Skip to content
Investment methodology

How we evaluate

Seven checks. One investment decision. We test the property, the numbers, the developer, the market and the assumptions behind the investment. If we cannot get comfortable with one of them, it does not make our list.

One property, taken through every check

Choose a check to see what was examined, what was found and why it matters, on one illustrative property.

JH-2588Marasi Riverside, Tower B, Business Bay1 bed · 742 sq ftOff-planPrepared by Mansoor Charaniya, 22 August 2026, for rental income

Illustrative. The property and every figure are those of the sample memo, prepared for rental income. The complete written report is the sample memo. Read the sample memo

01Property factsTitle, area, layout, service charge, developer record.
Schematic plan of the one-bedroom unitA one-bedroom apartment drawn as a schematic: living room, bedroom, bathroom, kitchen and balcony inside one outline, an entrance door, and one parking bay beside it. Numbered markers point at the details being verified; the numbers match the list beside the drawing.
  1. Asking priceUSD 441 K (AED 1.62 M)Developer price list, 22 Aug 2026
  2. Layout and area1 bed, 742 sq ft, mid floorSale agreement plan
  3. TenureFreehold, one allocated parking spaceSale agreement
  4. Stated handoverQ3 2028Developer, 22 Aug 2026
  5. Service charge3.87 USD / sq ft (AED 14.20) per year2026 budget of the delivered tower
  6. Developer delivery recordFirst tower delivered within four months of its stated dateHandover notices, 2025
Schematic plan, illustrative, not to scale
What was examined
  • The title deed or sale agreement, the registered area and the plan, read against the listing.
  • The service charge as budgeted for a delivered building, not the estimate in a brochure.
  • The stated handover date beside the developer's record on its last two projects.
What was found
A freehold one-bedroom of 742 sq ft, mid floor, off-plan, with handover stated for Q3 2028.
Why it matters
The service charge is modelled on the delivered tower's budget, not the brochure estimate. The developer's record is one delivery, four months late.
02Financial analysisNet yield from comparable lettings, costs taken out.
  1. Gross rentSix comparable lettings in the delivered tower, last nine monthsUSD 30,688(AED 112,700)
  2. Void, four weeks a yearBase case allowanceUSD 2,361(AED 8,669)
  3. Service charge, 742 sq ft2026 budget, delivered towerUSD 2,869(AED 10,536)
  4. Letting and management, 5% of rentAssumed for this sampleUSD 1,534(AED 5,635)
  5. Net income5.4% of the asking price, base caseUSD 23,924(AED 87,860)
Annual figures, base case. One scale, from the gross rent to the net income.
What was examined
  • Comparable lettings in the same building or community, dated, with their sizes and rents.
  • A void allowance and the service charge deducted before anything is called a net yield.
  • Every figure shown with the date or basis it was produced on.
What was found
Net income of 5.4% of the asking price in the base case, after the void, the charge and management.
Why it matters
Priced with the market. The service charge is what makes the income work.
03Developer and marketDelivery record, current supply, what is coming.
  1. 2022First tower in the community delivered
  2. 2025Second tower delivered, four months late, let within a quarter
  3. 2027 to 2028About 1,900 units scheduled to complete in Business Bay
  4. Q3 2028Stated handover for this tower

Two towers delivered in the community by this developer since 2022, both let within a quarter of handover. Roughly 1,900 units are scheduled to complete in Business Bay across 2027 and 2028, which is more than the last two years combined; absorption over the last twelve months ran ahead of that pace, but not by much.

The dated record, from the memo. Nothing beyond the supported events.
What was examined
  • What the developer delivered, when, and how far from the stated date.
  • Units scheduled to complete in the community over the next two years, from published launch data.
  • Absorption over the last twelve months, from transaction records.
What was found
Two towers delivered by this developer in the community since 2022, both let within a quarter. About 1,900 units are scheduled across 2027 and 2028.
Why it matters
The 2027 supply caps the exit for the first two years. For capital appreciation we would not proceed; for income the comparables hold.
04Scenario testingDownside, base and upside, moved together.
  • Downside

    Net yield4.3%

    Rent
    8% below the comparables
    Void
    Eight weeks a year
    Exit yield
    One point wider
  • BaseThe modelled case

    Net yield5.4%

    Rent
    As the comparables
    Void
    Four weeks a year
    Exit yield
    As today
  • Upside

    Net yield6.0%

    Rent
    Not stated in this sample
    Void
    Not stated in this sample
    Exit yield
    Not stated in this sample
Three cases side by side. Where the sample states no assumption, it says so.
What was examined
  • Three cases, with the assumptions behind each written out rather than left in a model.
  • Rent, void and exit yield moved together, because in a soft market they move together.
  • The downside built from a specific event, usually the next delivery wave, not a round number.
What was found
The downside clears 4.3% net. The upside is not evidenced in this sample and is shown as such.
Why it matters
The case does not depend on the upside. It depends on absorption holding through the first delivery wave.
05Risk assessmentThe two or three things that could go wrong.
The named risks of the sample memo
RiskPossible effectResponse
Supply: about 1,900 units completing in Business Bay in 2027 and 2028, in the same segmentRent below the comparables and a slower first letting; the downside caseOpen questionWhether absorption holds its recent pace through the first wave
Delivery: a slip past the stated quarterThe first rent a year later while the payment plan continuesMitigationHandover terms in the sale agreement, and the developer's record on the last two towers
Service charge: a budget a fifth above the delivered towerAbout one point off the net yieldMitigationModelled on the delivered tower's budget, not the estimate; to be confirmed at handover
One row per named risk. No score.
What was examined
  • Each risk with its likely effect on income or exit, in figures where the figures exist.
  • What would reduce it, or the question that stays open, stated as such.
  • No score. A named risk is more useful than a number nobody can trace.
What was found
Three named risks: supply, delivery, and the service charge. No score.
Why it matters
Two carry a mitigation. Supply stays an open question until the first wave lets, and it is the downside case.
06Data confidenceHow well evidenced every figure is.
Moderate confidenceModerate. A further quarter of lettings in the delivered tower, or the developer's own budget for this tower, would move it to high.
The figures of the sample memo, their sources, dates and evidence gaps
FigureSourceDatedEvidence gap
Asking priceUSD 441 K (AED 1.62 M)Developer price list22 Aug 2026
Layout and area1 bed, 742 sq ft, mid floorSale agreement planUndated
TenureFreehold, one allocated parking spaceSale agreementUndated
Stated handoverQ3 2028Developer22 Aug 2026
Service charge3.87 USD / sq ft (AED 14.20) per year2026 budget of the delivered tower2026No service-charge budget exists yet for this tower
Developer delivery recordFirst tower delivered within four months of its stated dateHandover notices2025
Gross rentUSD 30,688(AED 112,700)Six comparable lettings in the delivered towerLast nine monthsSix lettings is enough to model on and not enough to be sure of
Void, four weeks a yearUSD 2,361(AED 8,669)Base case allowanceUndated
Service charge, 742 sq ftUSD 2,869(AED 10,536)2026 budget, delivered tower2026
Letting and management, 5% of rentUSD 1,534(AED 5,635)Assumed for this sampleUndated
Absorption, last twelve monthsRan ahead of the scheduled supply, but not by muchDLD transaction records for the communityTransactions to 31 August 2026
Upside net yield6.0%Not stated in this sampleUndatedThe upside case is not evidenced in this sample
Every figure beside its source and date, and the gap the memo names where there is one.
What was examined
  • The sources behind the figures, how many, and how recent.
  • What the evidence cannot tell us yet, written down.
  • A word, limited, moderate or high, and what would move it up.
What was found
Moderate. Six lettings is enough to model on and not enough to be sure of.
Why it matters
A further quarter of lettings in the delivered tower, or the developer's own budget for this tower, would move it to high.
07Management reviewA person signs the view.

Priced with the market. The service charge is what makes the income work. For rental income at this price, we would proceed.

Rationale
The comparables are recent and in the same building, the charge is taken from a delivered budget, and the downside case still clears four per cent net.
Conditions and revisit triggers
  • For rental income only. For capital appreciation we would not proceed, because the 2027 supply caps the exit for the first two years.
  • Handover terms confirmed in the sale agreement before exchange.
  • The view is revisited if the 2027 launch pipeline grows.
Signed
Mansoor Charaniya
22 August 2026
What was examined
  • The concluding assessment, with the reasoning in one paragraph a reader can repeat.
  • The conditions under which the view holds, and the objectives it does not serve.
  • A name and a date on it.
What was found
For rental income at this price, we would proceed.
Why it matters
The view holds for income only, with handover terms confirmed before exchange.

The method beneath the example

Every property goes through the same seven checks, in the same order. What the checks draw on, how confidence is worded, where the weight falls, and who signs.

What the checks draw on

Documents and records, named, so a figure can be traced back to where it came from.

How confidence is worded

A word beside every figure, resting on how many sources stand behind it and how recent they are. What moves a figure up is more evidence: more sources, more recent ones, or a gap closed.

  1. Limited evidenceFew sources, or sources that are not recent, or a gap the evidence cannot close yet. The figure is still shown, with its date, and what is missing is written down beside it.
  2. Moderate confidenceEnough to model on and not enough to be sure of. The sources are named and recent, and what they cannot tell us yet is written down beside them.
  3. High confidenceSeveral sources, recent, with the gaps closed: the further lettings or the budget a moderate figure was waiting for.

Where we look hardest

What changes with the objective is where the weight falls: which checks the case lives or dies on. This is emphasis, never a score; no check is graded and none is skipped.

  • Rental income

    For rental income, the lettings evidence and the service charge carry the weight.

    We examine
    Lettings evidence. Service charges. Vacancy assumptions.
    The question
    What remains after the costs of ownership?

    02 Financial analysis · 06 Data confidence · 01 Property facts

  • Capital appreciation

    For capital appreciation, the developer, the pipeline and the downside case carry the weight.

    We examine
    The developer's delivery record. Supply scheduled in the community. The downside case.
    The question
    What has to be true for the exit to hold?

    03 Developer and market · 04 Scenario testing · 05 Risk assessment

  • Portfolio diversification

    For diversification, supply in the community and how thin the data is carry the weight.

    We examine
    Supply in the community. How thin the evidence is. The risks, named.
    The question
    How much of the case rests on evidence we cannot see yet?

    03 Developer and market · 06 Data confidence · 05 Risk assessment

  • A Dubai second home

    For a second home, the facts of the place and a person signing the view carry the weight.

    We examine
    Title, area and layout. The facts of the place. A person signing the view.
    The question
    Do the fundamentals hold when the rent is not the point?

    01 Property facts · 03 Developer and market · 07 Management review

  • Long-term wealth

    For long-term wealth, the scenarios and the named risks carry the weight.

    We examine
    Three scenarios, moved together. The risks that could actually go wrong. The management review.
    The question
    Does the case still clear in the downside?

    04 Scenario testing · 05 Risk assessment · 07 Management review

Who signs the view

A person signs it. The concluding assessment states the reasoning in one paragraph a reader can repeat, the conditions under which the view holds, the objectives it does not serve, and what would make us revisit it. It carries a name and a date.

Ask for an evaluation.

Tell us the property, or the objective, and we will say what the seven checks would look at.