Rent-to-rent vs commission management: the Floor Test every landlord should run

We ran the model most landlords are pitched. Here's what it looked like from inside

Rent-to-rent looks clean on paper: an operator takes your property, pays you a fixed monthly rent, runs it as a short let and keeps the difference. Guaranteed income, no effort. What could go wrong?

We know because we ran one. Fixed monthly overheads of £5,000–£6,000, rent, utilities, pool chemicals, cleaners, every month, whether the calendar was full or quiet. Net profit on a good month: £1,000–£1,500. In a slow February at 40% occupancy the floor didn't shrink; we funded the gap. We closed the company, not because it collapsed, but because the numbers told a quiet, honest story.

The Floor Test: two questions before you sign anything

Question one: what are the fixed monthly costs, and who pays them when occupancy drops? Every model has a floor: cleaning contracts, utilities, platform fees. The question is who stands beneath it. In rent-to-rent the operator absorbs the floor, which is why they protect themselves everywhere else, capped rent, long leases, corner-cutting when months run slow.

Question two: who has the upside when revenue is strong? Rent-to-rent caps your upside at the agreed rent. If the operator turns £3,000 a month into £12,000, you still see the same fixed payment. Commission management ties the manager's income to yours: when revenue rises, both sides earn more.

The model that answers question one with 'the manager carries costs that scale with revenue' and question two with 'you both' is the one worth having. That's why SNV charges 15% of booking revenue, no minimum, no fixed draw, no tie-in.