What this model actually compares

Both paths start with the same money. The buyer puts the down payment into the home and pays the mortgage, property tax, and maintenance every month. The renter keeps the down payment invested and, every month the owner pays more than rent, invests that difference too (and withdraws when rent costs more). At the end of the horizon the owner's net worth is the home's value minus selling costs and the remaining mortgage; the renter's is the investment account. Whichever is larger won, for that set of assumptions.

The assumptions do the arguing

This comparison is decided almost entirely by three inputs: home appreciation, investment return, and how long you stay. Short horizons punish buying because the down payment, land transfer, and 5% selling costs have not been amortized over enough years. Long horizons usually favor it. Nudge appreciation from 3% to 4% on the defaults and watch the answer flip; that sensitivity is the honest lesson of the exercise, and it is why this page shows the full year-by-year paths instead of a single verdict.

The Canadian detail most calculators miss

Canadian mortgage rates compound semi-annually, not monthly, so the same quoted rate produces a slightly lower payment than US-style math suggests. The convention toggle applies the correct formula. One simplification to know about: the model treats the mortgage as running at one rate for the whole amortization, while real Canadian mortgages renew every few years at whatever rates then prevail.

Educational estimates, not housing or investment advice. Transaction taxes, condo fees, and tax treatment of gains vary by province and situation.