Skip to main contentSkip to navigationSkip to footer

Case Study: Structuring a Fix-and-Flip with Hard Money

8 min
5/6

Key Takeaways

  • Always compare total project cost across lenders, not just rate or points in isolation.
  • The lowest rate does not always produce the lowest cost—points, terms, and rehab funding matter.
  • Cash-required vs. total-cost is the fundamental trade-off in hard money lender selection.
  • Fix-and-flip profitability is highly sensitive to carrying costs, making project timeline the critical variable.

This case study walks through a complete hard money-financed fix-and-flip project, from lender selection through loan payoff, illustrating how term sheet differences affect project profitability.

Project: 3BR Ranch — $185,000 Purchase, $60,000 Rehab

Project: 3BR Ranch — $185,000 Purchase, $60,000 Rehab

Lisa identifies a 3BR/1.5BA ranch home listed at $185,000 that needs $60,000 in renovations. Comparable renovated homes sell for $310,000-$325,000 (ARV estimate: $315,000). She needs $245,000 total to complete the project and plans a 6-month timeline. She solicits term sheets from three hard money lenders to compare total project cost.

Hard Money and Private Lending: 2024 Market Overview
The private lending industry has grown significantly as institutional capital enters the space: - **Total private lending market size**: Estimated $75-$85 billion in annual originations (2024) - **Number of active private lenders**: 5,000-7,000 nationwide - **Average loan size**: $285,000 (fix-and-flip); $450,000 (bridge/rental) - **Default rate**: 4-6% industry average (vs. 1-2% for conventional) - **Average investor ROI on private lending**: 8-12% annually - **Institutional share**: 45-55% of private lending now comes from institutional capital (up from 20% in 2015) - **Technology adoption**: 72% of loans now originated through online platforms (up from 35% in 2019) The shift toward institutional capital has compressed rates and standardized terms, benefiting borrowers but reducing flexibility compared to relationship-based private lending. Source: National Private Lenders Association, Scotsman Guide, 2024.
Comparing Three Hard Money Term Sheets

Comparing Three Hard Money Term Sheets

The three lenders offer meaningfully different terms that affect total project cost by tens of thousands of dollars.

TermLender ALender BLender C
Loan Amount$222,750 (90% PP + 100% rehab)$203,500 (80% PP + 75% rehab)$185,000 (100% PP only)
Interest Rate12%11%10%
Points3 ($6,683)2 ($4,070)4 ($7,400)
Term12 months12 months9 months
Extension$500/month1 pointNone
Draw Process4 draws, 10% holdback3 draws, no holdbackNo rehab funding
Cash Required$22,250 + closing$41,500 + closing$60,000 rehab + closing
6-Month Interest$13,365$11,193$9,250
Total Loan Cost (6mo)$20,048$15,263$16,650

Hard money term sheet comparison for $245K total project cost

Analysis and Selection

Analysis and Selection

Lender A requires the least cash out of pocket ($22,250) but costs the most ($20,048 over 6 months). Lender B offers the lowest total cost ($15,263) but requires $41,500 in cash. Lender C requires the most cash ($60,000 for rehab) despite having the lowest rate, because it does not fund renovation costs. Lisa selects Lender B as the optimal balance of cash required and total cost. Her total project economics: Purchase $185,000 + Rehab $60,000 + Carrying costs (interest $11,193 + points $4,070 + taxes/insurance $3,000 + utilities $1,200) + Selling costs (6% commission + $3,000 closing = $21,900) = $286,363 total cost. Sale at $315,000 yields gross profit of $28,637, a 22% return on her $41,500 cash investment over 6 months (44% annualized).

Key Takeaways

  • Always compare total project cost across lenders, not just rate or points in isolation.
  • The lowest rate does not always produce the lowest cost—points, terms, and rehab funding matter.
  • Cash-required vs. total-cost is the fundamental trade-off in hard money lender selection.
  • Fix-and-flip profitability is highly sensitive to carrying costs, making project timeline the critical variable.

Common Mistakes to Avoid

Starting a flip without a detailed scope of work and contractor bids

Consequence: Undefined scopes lead to change orders, cost overruns, and blown timelines that eat into the hard money loan term

Correction: Complete a detailed scope of work with line-item bids from at least two contractors before closing on the property

Not budgeting for holding costs beyond the planned rehab timeline

Consequence: A 3-month project overrun on a 12% hard money loan adds 3% of the loan amount in interest alone

Correction: Budget 2-3 extra months of carrying costs as a contingency and include extension fees in your worst-case scenario analysis

Test Your Knowledge

1.In a fix-and-flip deal, what metric best determines whether hard money is cost-effective?

2.What is the most critical risk factor in a hard money fix-and-flip project?

3.What percentage of ARV do most hard money lenders limit their total loan commitment to?