Short term let vs long term let: which earns landlords more?

One of the biggest decisions a landlord makes is whether to let a property on a standard tenancy or as a short term let. Both have their place, but they behave very differently. Here is a clear comparison across the things that matter.

Income

A long term let gives you a fixed monthly rent, predictable but capped. A short term let is rented by the night, and in an area with demand it often earns two to three times the monthly rent, though it varies with season and occupancy. On income alone, a well run short let usually wins in the right location.

Flexibility

With a long tenancy your property is tied up for six or twelve months. With a short let you keep control of your own calendar, so you can block dates to use the property yourself or for family. That flexibility is a genuine benefit that a tenancy cannot offer.

Risk and void periods

A long let carries the risk of problem tenants, late rent and void periods. A short let has guests who are vetted, pay in full upfront, and stay only a few nights, so there is no long tenancy to unwind if something goes wrong. Professional cleaning between stays keeps the property in good condition.

Workload

This is where the long let looks easier, since a short let needs active management. But with a management company handling the guests, cleaning and pricing, a short let becomes just as hands off as a tenancy, while still earning more.

Costs

A short let has more running costs, cleaning, linen, utilities and a management fee, which is why you compare net income, not just the headline booking revenue. Even after those costs, the short let often comes out ahead in a strong location.

Which should you choose?

If your property is in an area with short let demand and you want the highest income with flexibility, a managed short let usually wins. If you value complete simplicity and your property is in a low demand area, a long let may suit you better.