10% down vs. 20% down: what the simulation says
The standard advice — "put 20% down, avoid PMI" — treats the down payment as a payment-optimization problem. It's really a risk allocation problem: every extra dollar you put down converts liquid, layoff-surviving, market-compounding savings into illiquid home equity. Whether that trade helps or hurts depends on things a rule of thumb can't see. So, the simulation: one household buying the same $650K house at 10%, 20%, and 30% down, a thousand futures each, identical random draws.
The same house, three ways
- 10% down: $89,894 at closing; $5,183/mo all-in (including PMI); 76% of futures reach independence on time
- 20% down: $159,043 at closing; $4,539/mo all-in; 79% of futures reach independence on time
- 30% down: $228,191 at closing; $4,139/mo all-in; 79% of futures reach independence on time
The simulation talks back to the folklore in both directions. Going down to 10% costs this household real odds — 3% of futures — because PMI plus interest on the larger loan drains more, year after year, than the $69,149 it kept invested manages to earn back at these rates. But going up to 30% buys essentially nothing over 20%: the payment falls, the invested balance falls with it, and the two nearly cancel. The folklore says "more down is safer"; the model says the safety plateaus at exactly the point the PMI disappears.
Where the liquidity story is true
Note who this household is: the planner's default, with $250K liquid — even the 30%-down version closes with a comfortable cushion, which is why its forced-sale rate rounds to zero in every row and the whole question gets decided by carrying costs. For a household that would be scraping the account to zero at closing, the calculus inverts: the buffer guide shows the forced-sale rate falling roughly tenfold as the first six months of post-closing cash appear. If putting 20% down means closing with nothing left, a 10%-down purchase with PMI and a buffer is the safer structure, and the simulation will show it for your numbers. "Always avoid PMI" answers the average case; you aren't the average case.
The question underneath: where does a marginal dollar work hardest?
A dollar of extra down payment earns the mortgage rate, guaranteed, in avoided interest — 6.3% here, more if it's also retiring PMI (0.5% of the loan per year until equity reaches 20%). A dollar kept invested earns the market's distribution — 7% expected, with fat left-tail years — and stays reachable in an emergency. At today's spread those forces run close enough that the answer flips on details: the PMI premium, your tax drag, how thin the buffer already is. Which is why this is a number to recompute, not a belief to hold. (Rates move the whole affordability picture, not just this margin.)
What to do with this
Decide the down payment after the emergency fund, not before — the buffer guide quantifies why the months after closing are the fragile ones. Then let the planner grade your actual choice: set your real savings, flip the down payment between 10% and 20%, and watch the odds and the forced-sale rate — not the payment — tell you which version of the purchase is safer. The household here is the planner's default ($220,000 income, $250K liquid); with your numbers, the answer can flip.
Read next
- Why the 28% rule misleads
- Sequence-of-returns risk is a home-buying problem
- Rent vs. buy is the wrong question
- How a house purchase moves your FIRE date
- What a mortgage rate actually does to what you can afford
- What "house poor" actually looks like in the numbers
- How big an emergency fund do home buyers really need?
- Should you wait to buy? The arithmetic of timing the housing market
- Run the simulator — every claim in this guide is inspectable there, assumption by assumption.