Most rent-vs-buy tools only compare monthly payments. This one compares where you actually end up: it invests the down payment you'd have kept by renting, and counts appreciation, upkeep and selling costs on the buying side, then tells you who is wealthier and when buying wins.
$400,000 home, 20% down, 6.5% mortgage, $2,500 rent, 3% growth, 7% investing. Net worth gap, buyer minus renter, over time.
| After | Buyer net worth | Renter net worth | Buying is ahead by |
|---|---|---|---|
| 3 years | $102,330 | $125,899 | renting ahead $23,569 |
| 5 years | $136,332 | $149,407 | renting ahead $13,075 |
| 7 years | $173,101 | $173,582 | renting ahead $482 |
| 10 years | $235,927 | $212,836 | $23,091 |
| 15 years | $376,894 | $298,513 | $78,380 |
| 30 years | $1,283,881 | $823,608 | $460,273 |
Because if you rent, that large sum is not tied up in a house, so it can be invested and compound. A fair rent-vs-buy comparison has to credit the renter with that growth, which most simple calculators skip. It is often the single biggest factor in the result.
Usually, given enough time, because you stop paying rent and build equity while the home appreciates. But the first few years are dominated by closing and selling costs and mostly-interest mortgage payments, so buying often loses if you move soon. The break-even is typically several years; the table and your own numbers above show it.
Local property tax and HOA differences, mortgage interest tax deductions, maintenance surprises, and the fact that markets are not smooth. It also assumes you actually invest the difference when renting. Adjust the assumptions above to stress-test the answer.