The rent vs buy debate is more complex for FIRE seekers than conventional wisdom suggests. The answer depends on your market, timeline, and opportunity cost. Here's the honest analysis.
"Buying is always better than renting" is a myth. Whether buying beats renting depends on: the price-to-rent ratio in your local market, how long you plan to stay, what you would do with the down payment if you rented, and transaction costs (stamp duty, agent fees).
Renters can invest the difference — a down payment of $100,000 invested in a global index fund at 7% returns $386,000 over 20 years. If equivalent housing costs $500/month more to rent than to own, the renter invests that $500/month too. Over 20 years at 7%, that's an additional $260,000.
Renting also provides mobility — FIRE seekers who move countries or cities (often to lower cost-of-living areas in retirement) aren't locked into property. Geographic arbitrage is a powerful FIRE tool that renters access freely.
A paid-off home dramatically reduces your FIRE expenses — and therefore your FIRE number. If your mortgage costs less than equivalent rent (possible in many markets), buying is forced saving with leverage. Property can also provide rental income in retirement.
Run the numbers for your specific market. The New York Times rent vs buy calculator is the gold standard. In highly priced markets (London, Sydney, Dubai), renting and investing often comes out ahead. In more affordable markets with stable prices, buying often wins. There is no universal answer.