Staying in the house and still freeing up money — which path holds up?

As at: June 2026 · ← back to the guide

The answer first. A partial sale, a life annuity and a reverse mortgage promise the same thing — money out of the house without moving out — but carry very different risks. With a partial sale you pay a usage fee for the sold portion from then on; with a life annuity everything hangs on your lifespan and on the provider’s reliability; with a reverse mortgage the debt keeps quietly growing through interest over the years. The only honest comparison is the monthly net burden over the long run. So get a second opinion before any signature — from the consumer advice centre and a tax adviser. Often the simpler path is the better one.

In a partial sale you sell a share of your house to a provider and keep the rest. You receive a one-off sum and remain owner of the remaining part. At first this sounds like the best-of-both model. The catch lies in the ongoing usage fee: for the sold share you pay a kind of rent to the provider, month after month, for as long as you live there. Over the years that adds up considerably, and the fee can rise. Often there are further conditions on the later full sale that narrow your room to manoeuvre. You see the one-off sum at once; the monthly burden you carry quietly over ten, twenty years. It is precisely that burden you must work out first, before the sum convinces you.

With a life annuity you sell the house against a lifelong monthly payment and a secured right of residence. You do not move out, but ownership passes over. The appeal is predictability: a fixed income for the years to come. The risk is a bet on your own lifespan. Live long and it was a good deal; if someone dies early, a large part of the house’s value stays with the provider. You also depend for decades on that provider’s reliability — the monthly payment must be firmly secured and registered in the land register, otherwise you share the default risk. Check carefully who pays you the annuity and what happens if that provider runs into difficulty.

A reverse mortgage is a loan against your own house that you do not repay during your lifetime. You receive money, stay living there, and the debt only falls due when you move out or die. The treacherous part is the compounding: because you repay nothing, the interest is added each year to the growing balance — over long periods this compound interest eats up a large part of the house’s value. What begins as a manageable amount can, after twenty years, tie up a considerable share of the inheritance. Correspondingly less remains for the coming generation. A reverse mortgage can fit where no one is meant to inherit and the house will not stay in the family anyway — but that is a decision made with open cards and a second opinion.

All three models are financial products with providers who earn from them. Before you choose one, it pays to compare the monthly net burden soberly over ten and over twenty years — and to look at the simpler paths. Often a normal sale with a move into a smaller, age-appropriate home yields more on balance and ties no one to a contract spanning decades. If the house is to stay in the family, a usufruct (Nießbrauch) or a right of residence is often the calmer frame: you keep living there, ownership passes over in good order, with no outside provider in between. And sometimes the best decision is to do nothing yet and sort the question out in peace. A second opinion — from the consumer advice centre and a tax adviser — costs little and guards against a signature you carry for twenty years.

The calculator below sets the paths roughly side by side. It is a first orientation, not advice and not an offer — the sound calculation belongs in a conversation with an independent body.

This article provides orientation and does not replace legal or tax advice. Before signing, the contracts belong with an independent body — the consumer advice centre and a tax adviser; the notary records the deed.