600 Del Verde Cir #6

Sacramento, CA 95833

$215,000F

2 bd · 1.0 ba · 956 sqft · Built 1982 · Condo · Pending · 14 DOM

Cashflow @ list (25.0% down · 7.5%)

• Estimated rent: $1,995/mo
• Mortgage (P&I): −$1,127
• Tax + insurance: −$281
• HOA: −$538
• Vac / Maint / Mgmt: −$419
• Net cashflow: $-370/mo
• Annual: $-4,439/yr
• Cap rate: 4.23%
• Cash-on-cash: -7.37%
• DSCR: 0.67
• 1% rule: 0.93%
• Cash to close: $60,200

Investor read

• This is a 2-bed/1.0-bath condo listed at $215k.
• At list price, monthly cash flow is $-370 ($-4k/yr) — negative.
• To cash-flow at today's rent, offer at most $150k (30.4% below list).
• To meet the 1% rule (rent ≥ 1% of price), the offer needs to be $200k (7.2% below list).
• Only 14 days on market — expect competitive offers; lowballing is unlikely to land.
• Recommended offer: $150k (30.4% below list) — sets the bar for cash-flow.
• Local home prices are declining (-3.0%/yr); year-one equity from $1k of loan paydown is wiped out by about $6k of value loss. Plan a longer hold.
• Location reads 71/100 on livability (#218 in CA) — a middle-class / working-renter tenant base. Strengths: amenities A+, commute A+, housing A; Watch: crime F, cost of living F.
• Natomas Unified (urban): math 33% / reading 60% proficiency, ranked #155 of 517 in CA (top 30%) — families likely to look elsewhere, expect single-tenant / working-renter base with shorter leases.
• Zoned schools: Jefferson (713 students, 68% FRL); Natomas Middle (662 students, 65% FRL); Natomas High (math 17% / reading 37%, grade F, #788 of 1,170 statewide, top 69%, 1,229 students, 63% FRL) — zoned schools average 65% FRL vs 45% district-wide (21 pts higher); higher-poverty schools than district average — tighter screening recommended.
• Zoned-school proficiency averages 27% at this address vs 46% district-wide (-20 pts) — the specific schools serving this property underperform the Natomas Unified average; the district grade overstates school quality for this exact location.
• Watch-outs: HOA is 27% of rent.
• Market conditions: Rents rising (+3.8%/yr); 136 active listings in the ZIP; 36 comparable units currently listed for rent nearby; rentals leasing fast (median 1d on market — plan ~1-2 weeks tenant-placement turnaround); solid renter incomes; 6,825 units permitted in Sacramento County in 2024 (1,752 in 5+ unit buildings).
• Sacramento County population projected at +17% by 2050 — long-run rental-demand tailwind backs the buy-and-hold thesis.
• Current owner paid $160k; 34% above their basis — modest negotiation headroom, anchor on the comps not their cost.
• Cap rate 4.2% vs local median 3.0% in Sacramento — top-decile yield for the area; either an underpriced asset or a hidden risk that comps aren't pricing in. Stress-test before assuming the spread holds.

Questions for listing agent

• What do current leases actually rent for vs. the listed asking? Can we see a recent rent roll and the last 12 months of T-12 income?
• What does the HOA fee cover, when was the last increase, and are there any pending special assessments or reserve-fund shortfalls?
• Any open or pending special assessments — roof, HVAC, plumbing, elevator, façade? What's the per-unit balance and payoff schedule, and is the seller paying it off at close or rolling it to the buyer?
• Is there a deadline driving the sale (1031 exchange, divorce, estate, relocation)? That informs how much negotiation room exists.
• Schools are D-rated, which usually means shorter tenancies and higher turnover. Who's the typical renter profile here, and what's been the actual vacancy rate?
• Crime grade is F in this area — have there been break-ins, vandalism, or insurance claims at this property in the last 3 years? What carrier currently insures it and at what premium?
• The area grade is low — what's the realistic commute time and amenity access for the typical tenant pool here? Any planned neighborhood developments (good or bad) we should know about?
• What's the average days-on-market for RENTAL listings here right now (not sales)? A rising rental-DOM trend means longer vacancies and softer asking-rent achievability than the comps imply.