Borrowing To Invest: What The Experts Have To Say

Warren Buffett famously said that investors should “be fearful when others are greedy and greedy when others are fearful.” Yet one look at statistics on leveraged investing suggests that we do the exact opposite: Investors have borrowed more money than ever to buy into this post-financial crisis bull market.

Leverage can be a powerful tool in the right hands – an investor with a long time horizon and the fortitude to stick with the strategy through rocky times. It’s human nature to assume our risk tolerance is higher than it is, but ask yourself how you’d feel watching your leveraged investment drop 50 percent during the market crash of 2008-09?

Related: What are you doing with this stock market pullback?

There’s also an air of mystery surrounding leverage that we don’t like to talk about. In his first book, Stop Working, Here’s How You Can!, Canada’s self-professed youngest retiree Derek Foster offered common sense advice on building a portfolio of dividend paying stocks – a strategy that inspired many investors to emulate in hopes to achieve early retirement.

But Foster omitted a crucial detail in his story: his aggressive use of leverage, including a huge bet on then troubled cigarette maker Philip Morris using $140,000 of borrowed money to amplify his gains.

It’s that type of thinking that leads to questions like this one that I received from a reader:

“With Canadian Oil Sands (COS) paying a juicy 8% dividend, does it make sense to borrow money at 4% to invest in this stock? The dividend is more than enough to pay the interest on the loan, and there is potential for capital gains.”

I reached out to 15 leading experts on personal finance and investing to get their thoughts on borrowing to invest. This two-part series will explore the pros and cons of using leverage, the risks you need to understand before you consider this approach, and the best ways to use a leveraged investment strategy.

Borrowing To Invest: What The Experts Have To Say

Borrowing to invest

First, some thoughts from our experts on borrowing to invest:

Frugal Trader, from the Million Dollar Journey blog

Leverage can be a very powerful wealth building tool, but it can also be a wealth destroying weapon. It works for those who have a long investment horizon AND have the risk tolerance to watch the amplified ups and downs of their account balance.

Robert Brown, author of Wealthing Like Rabbits

I’m not a fan of borrowing to invest. As in most things, there are exceptions to the rule but too often that exception becomes the rule.

Is this person 62 years of age and considering leveraging as a way to “swing for the fence” to fund their retirement? Bad, bad idea. Is this person 31 with enough cash that they could fund this investment themselves, but is considering leveraging to protect that liquidity?  Big, big difference.

Bruce Sellery, author of Moolala

I don’t think most people are equipped to borrow to invest. They get stars in their eyes about the upside potential, but don’t fully comprehend the consequences of the downside.

True, the math can work in your favour, provided you factor in fees associated with investing, but the risks can be significant – Stock market declines, economic weakness, changes in government policy such as the Conservatives change on income trusts.  I have seen too many horror stories to endorse this approach.

John Heinzl, Globe and Mail columnist

I am not a fan of borrowing to invest. While leverage can increase your returns when the market rises, it magnifies your losses when the market falls. Many investors think only of the upside and are not prepared for the fear and regret that takes over when they lose capital that they borrowed and still have to pay back.

I have seen experienced investors use leverage successfully after a correction, but I would not do it myself. I much prefer to save money to invest rather than borrow it. If someone is unable to save enough money to invest then they should address their spending and saving patterns before taking out a loan.

Dan Bortolotti, the Canadian Couch Potato blog

I would ask an investor who bought a leveraged investment after the “correction” of September 2008. How would they have felt when the 10% dip turned into an almost-50% plunge within a few more months. In theory, borrowing to buy stocks during a downturn might make sense, but it takes exceptional discipline to execute, and precious few investors have that.

Larry Elford, investor advocate at Breach of Trust

Any investment that can go up at a rate above the cost of borrowing might be considered a win if an investor can handle the near exponential level of risk caused by leveraging. But while you have no guarantee whatsoever on the investment performance, there is an iron-clad guarantee that the debt clock will tick against you.

When adding in the perverse investment dealer incentives (commissions, fees) that motivate investment sellers (aka “advisors) to push larger and larger sales, leverage is often an indicator that one had a very poor and/or desperate investment “advisor”.

This strategy is for very well-off experts and possibly no one else.

Sandi Martin, fee only planner at Spring Personal Finance

If your cash flow can support it, if you’ve thought through the very worst case scenario and it won’t bankrupt you or give you ulcers, if your time horizon is long enough to make the timing of your purchase largely irrelevant, why not?

Talbot Stevens author of Smart Debt Coach

Being a “dividend landlord,” where you finance dividend-income property instead of real estate, can be an effective wealth strategy for those who, like me, don’t like fixing toilets. The math is even more compelling than first appears, because interest is 100% deductible, while dividend income is taxed less.

This is where being a “dividend landlord” has a big advantage over a traditional landlord. An investor can’t buy even one property in most cities with $250K, but could easily own 5 or 10 properties that pay tax-preferred dividends.

Rob Carrick, Globe and Mail columnist

Borrowing to invest – a.k.a. leveraging – is the definitive case of an idea looking good on paper and too often turning out to be disastrous in real life. Only the steadiest of investors can handle the idea of going into debt to buy into the ever-unpredictable stock market.

Most people are wired to panic and sell when the stocks they bought with borrowed money tank, thereby guaranteeing a bad outcome.

Jason Heath, fee only planner at Objective Financial Partners

A tight spread, historically, between prime rate and market returns, coupled with the risk of an investor bailing when the going gets bad, are two key reasons I’m leery to endorse leveraging.

I prefer generally to see leverage used to invest in rental real estate. It’s a less liquid asset that helps protect against the knee jerk reaction of selling stocks during a downturn.

Ellen Roseman, Toronto Star columnist

I’m not in favour of leveraged investing for 90 per cent of investors. Most people find it hard enough to stay invested when stock prices are depressed. When they also pay interest on a loan, they are doubly impatient to see results.

Norm Rothery, columnist at the Globe and Mail and MoneySense

I don’t really have much to say on the subject of borrowing to invest other than to say that it is generally a bad idea. I’m rather fond of Buffett’s quip, “I’ve seen more people fail because of liquor and leverage – leverage being borrowed money. You really don’t need leverage in this world much. If you’re smart, you’re going to make a lot of money without borrowing.”

Those who impatiently strive to make a great fortune in the markets by borrowing tend to walk away penniless.

Adam Mayers, Investment and Personal Finance editor at the Toronto Star

Borrowing to invest is fine as long as you understand the risks and you have a long-term horizon. Leverage is great when things are going up, not so good when it goes the other way. In the short run markets are unpredictable as the last month or so shows.

But if you’re just trying to time the market I’d say not. That’s a mugs game and isn’t really investing. It’s placing a bet, which is gambling.

Betting on a single stock

Preet Banerjee, author of Stop Over-Thinking Your Money!

The pros seem enticing: the interest is deductible; the dividend income is taxed preferentially, as is any potential capital gain. The problem is the extreme risk. Investing in a single stock is speculative. Borrowing to invest in a single stock is gambling.

A dividend cut could eliminate the positive cash flow of the strategy, and in turn would likely lead to a drop in stock price. Unwinding the strategy could leave the investor with a huge loss.

Leveraging to invest makes sense if you can predict the future. If not, then it just magnifies the risk and potential return.

Nelson Smith from the Financial Uproar blog:

Whenever you’re borrowing to buy an asset — whether it be a house, stock, or anything else, there’s an added risk compared to just buying it outright. This can either lead to the investment doing really well or quite poorly. It all comes down to the amount of risk an investor can stomach. Real estate investors have done this for years, and it tends to work out for them.

If it works, it can really accelerate building wealth. And if it doesn’t, you could be in some serious trouble.

Bortolotti: Unless you plan on buying a GIC, the yield on your leveraged investment is meaningless. A stock might pay a dividend that’s higher than the interest rate on the loan, but there is always the potential for a stock to lose 30% or 40%, or perhaps a lot more, leaving you with a loan principal that exceeds the value of the asset.

My concern was the original question framed leverage like a free lunch. That scares me.”

Martin: The pro is just what it seems – the potential to make more money from the investment than you pay to borrow it. The con is a great big flashing neon sign that says “Are you sure your interest rate and sustainable dividend assumptions are correct? What exactly will happen if you’re wrong and you lose money?” (It’s quite a large sign).

Heinzl: Regarding Canadian Oil Sands, the first question the investor should ask is: Is this a sound investment on its own merits? COS’s dividend may look attractive now, but its dividend has been quite volatile over the years. The fact that it is currently yielding 8 per cent — more than the interest rate on the loan — provides no guarantee whatsoever that an investor will come out ahead by borrowing to buy the stock.

Stevens: The risk with a very high dividend stock is that it might not be sustainable, and/or the stock will fall. To reduce this risk: 1) Choose stocks with stable and increasing dividends instead of highest yields. 2) Diversify as much as practical, not borrowing for only one dividend stock.

Heath: It’s tough for a stock to pay a high distribution indefinitely. It may mean they’re leveraging or foregoing future growth to keep a payout ratio high or that the stock is falling and the dividend rate, based on historical dividends, is therefore magnified.

Lehman Brothers was paying a great dividend rate on paper as they went to zero. Because any dividend on a low value is enticing, it doesn’t mean it’s a good investment to buy on leverage, let alone, at all.

Brown: The investment would have to return more than the cost of servicing the debt and there are just no guarantees any equity stock will.

Frugal Trader: I use leverage for dividend paying stocks in non-registered accounts – similar to what your reader is describing.  This allows me to claim the tax deduction on the interest paid on the investment loan while, at the same time, taking advantage of the dividend tax credit.

I buy individual dividend stocks with borrowed money, and add to my positions when valuations are attractive. For example, with the recent energy correction, I added to some of my energy positions.

Roseman: There are three things that can go wrong when you buy high-yield stocks with a low-interest loan.

One, the company (or the industry) is in financial trouble. That can explain why the yield is higher than average.

Two, the company can’t sustain the dividend and reduces it or eliminates it altogether.

Three, the interest rate on your loan goes up. Most borrowers have short-term floating rates. With more expensive financing and a reduced dividend, the benefits of a leverage strategy can fly out the window.

Mayers: If you buy good quality stocks, or mutual funds that hold them, that are leaders in their industry, with established businesses that pay dividends you’ll come out ahead in the long run.

When corrections occur these stocks fall last and recover first and they’ll pay you a dividend in good times or bad. If they’re Canadian you get the added incentive of the dividend tax credit.

Avoid conflicts of interest

Carrick: Leveraged investing is a big money maker for the financial industry because of the interest income it generates, and because it allows people to invest more money than they would otherwise be able to muster and thus generate bigger fees and commissions.

Elford: Get advice from a fee-only planner, coach, or a fiduciary level licensed and registered adviser. Most of these people are not motivated and “incentivized”, (nor legally allowed) to sell investments that will likely harm the customer.

The net result is that, for many ordinary investors, it’s the “blind leading the blind” into debt and one of those blind people is simply a fee-or-commission-hungry salesperson in disguise.  The odds of success for the investor is tiny, while the odds of success for the investment dealer and his or her salesperson are tremendous.

Banerjee: Ask your advisor how much will be generated in commissions for their recommendation. There is a huge incentive to recommend leverage because it magnifies commissions. But remember, it also magnifies risk.

Not surprisingly, one of the leading sources of investor complaints against advisors is unsuitable leverage. Tread carefully.

Heinzl: Many advisers love borrowing to invest because it is the quickest way to build their clients’ assets and therefore make more money from fees and commissions. In addition to the emotional consequences mentioned above, the interest rate on the loan creates a hurdle that the investor has to beat just to break even.

Stevens: Deal with a trusted advisor to help you understand all of the pros and cons, implement a plan that makes sense for you, and stick to it.

Final thoughts on borrowing to invest

Part one of this two-part series looked at the risks involved when borrowing to invest. You get the impression that leveraged investing isn’t suitable for the majority of investors.

That said, for those who understand the risks (or choose to ignore them), part-two examines how best to use a leveraged investing strategy. We’ll look at the type of investor who is best suited for this approach and the mechanics behind successful implementation.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email


  1. Dan @ Our Big Fat Wallet on October 26, 2014 at 4:30 pm

    I think borrowing to invest is a mixed bag. From a tax perspective the interest is deductible against the income earned which obviously reduces taxes on the investment income. On the other hand, as noted above lots of people have a hard time staying invested during a downturn without borrowing – how many of these people are able to hang on and ride out a market downturn if the investments were purchased using borrowed money? It works for some, like Frugaltrader, but if you’ll notice his portfolio it is very diversified. Investing 100% in one stock like COS on borrowed money is never a good idea

    • Echo on October 27, 2014 at 7:47 pm

      Hi Dan, I noticed the number of bloggers discussing strategies like the Smith Manoeuvre ramped up in 2006-07 and then died right down during and after the financial crisis. Apparently the volatility was too difficult to handle in bad times, which of course makes sense.

  2. Tim Smith on October 26, 2014 at 11:39 pm

    Our strategy of borrowing to invest worked back in 2000 when we noticed that longer term Canada, provincial zero coupon bonds were at 6.00% to 6.50%.

    We borrowed $175,000 as we already had $275,000 in maturing GIC’s in 2004. We bought 5 individual zero coupon bonds which are mature in about 29 years on average and have a 6.27% average maturity date as well.

    We had a gut feeling that bond yields would drop and would stay low as equity markets were in an 18 year bull market increased by 1500%.

    It was a great move as we will have matured non-registered zero coupon bonds worth $1,028,816 in 2029 and 2030.

    We paid off all our $175,000 line of credit and all interest of $32,000 paid in 4 years was all deducted from our interest income on our income tax returns.

    This one great financial move now means we can retire at 57 instead of 65. We took this chance because we also had $150,000 in RRSP’s back in 2000 and had no mortgage or debts.

    Our RRSP’s are now worth $500,000 and we also have $65,000 in TFSA’s. Our non-registered not including these 5 zero coupon bonds is $200,000 as well all in GIC’s.

    • Echo on October 27, 2014 at 7:52 pm

      Hi Tim, I’m glad things worked out for you but I’d hesitate to say your “gut feeling” was anything more than blind luck. It certainly could have gone the other way.

      That said, better to take a big risk when you have a long runway in front of you than when you’re a year or two away from retirement and still looking for a home run.

      • Tim Smith on October 27, 2014 at 10:48 pm

        Echo, I did not really explain what my gut feeling was about. I looked at Japan’s maturing economy and stock markets, real estate markets and it seemed very similar to North America’s situation back in 2000.

        It did not end up like Japan’s deflation economy but on the interest rate side, bond yields are down by alot, by 47% down 6.50% to 3.50% on longer term provincial zeros.

        Canada longer term zeros are even worse at 6.00 % to 2.75%, down 54%.

        Also, if bond yields increased then we will would still be greatly financially ahead too because new investments would be earning more than 6.50%.

        I would not be surprised if we don’t see 6.50% zeros until 2029 to 2030. Interest rates are not going up much for awhile.

  3. Aman Raina on October 27, 2014 at 8:18 am
    • Echo on October 27, 2014 at 7:56 pm

      @Aman – thanks for sharing!

  4. Gail Bebee on October 27, 2014 at 8:28 am

    This is a bull market question. Who was asking about leveraged investing in 2008? Almost no one.
    Leverage is not a good idea for the vast majority of investors.

    • Echo on October 27, 2014 at 7:57 pm

      @Gail – That seems to be the consensus. Thanks for stopping by.

  5. My Own Advisor on October 27, 2014 at 12:51 pm

    Wow, great stuff here.

    I’m not a fan of borrowing money for investment purposes myself. I prefer to save first then invest. Borrowing money for investing implies you don’t have the money to invest in the first place, somewhat like taking out a massive mortgage to buy a fancy house. Besides, there are no guarantees when it comes to investment returns and there are too many investment factors you cannot control with leverage (such as your investment returns).

    I don’t do it now but may consider it years down the road only when my mortgage is far lower than it is now, whereby I could payoff the loan outright if absolutely necessary.


    • Echo on October 27, 2014 at 7:59 pm

      Hi Mark, I liked Bruce’s point about when the Feds changed the rules on income trusts. How many investors got burned in the fallout? What happens if they close loopholes around using home equity loans, or change the dividend tax credit? Plenty to lose, not much to gain.

  6. Tawcan on October 27, 2014 at 2:30 pm

    I’m not a fan of borrowing money to invest. I’ve known a few people personally that got into big financial troubles when leveraging goes wrong. The stories are pretty ugly. I’m not comfortable putting my family in situations where we’d be force to sell assets.

    • Echo on October 27, 2014 at 8:04 pm

      @Tawcan – One of my biggest regrets was getting in over my head as a first-time home buyer. I couldn’t afford the payments and dug myself into a lot of debt. I was bailed out, luckily, by rising home prices and so I was able to consolidate the debt using home equity. It could have been a different story if the real estate market tanked.

  7. Dale on October 27, 2014 at 5:50 pm

    Evidently a great many investors faced with this question have never looked at their balance sheet. If they are already carrying high-interest debts (e.g. credit card balances) they should save and eliminate those first for the highest return on their money.

    I always have a clear view of my total portfolio $. If I want to buy something and don’t have enough cash, I identify a poor performer and sell it to get the cash needed.

    Have the discipline to save not borrow, to invest

    • Echo on October 27, 2014 at 8:06 pm

      Hi Dale, great point. Anyone who carries debt, even a mortgage, alongside their investments is already effectively using leverage to invest.

  8. Drew on October 27, 2014 at 7:06 pm

    Way to not put any of your own thoughts into this and simply copy and paste what “experts” think, who are also covering their own ass in the comments they make. Take a look at Buffet…he used cheap cash to magnify his returns using a disciplined investment strategy. While not for everyone, I’m sick of all the negativity surrounding leveraging. If you’re disciplined, leverage is your friend.

    • Echo on October 27, 2014 at 8:17 pm

      Hi Drew, you must have missed the title of the post – “What the experts have to say.” At least give me credit for writing the intro.

      I think we’ve established that 90 percent of investors have terrible habits that get them into trouble, which is why most should stick to a simple low cost indexing approach and certainly avoid any leverage that will only serve to amplify their mistakes.

      That said, I’m sure you’ll enjoy part-two where we put the gloves away and dive into some strategies for the 10 percent of investors who have the discipline to use leverage to their advantage.

  9. Anne @ Money Propeller on October 27, 2014 at 8:50 pm

    I have quite a large risk appetite. Two weeks ago I borrowed to buy in. This particular move is just adding to a position I already have. It combines the investment interest deduction and the Canadian dividends gross up, for a pretty sweet deal. The amount borrowed is due to cash flow and opportunity timing; and it’s absolutely an amount I can afford to lose completely, on the off chance that this particular play goes that way. I’ve got two exit strategies in mind, as well.
    I love me some leverage 🙂 That said, it is absolutely not for everyone!

  10. Johnny on October 31, 2014 at 6:59 am

    I love leverage. The mathematics is compelling: Borrow at 3%, reap at 8% average. And thus I have been doing for about 15 years more or less continuously (I sold the 2nd house one year and paid off the debt). The key is to not be forced out either by your own bad behaviour or margin calls. I do however agree that 90% of folks will fail at the “own bad behavior” part of the equation. This is what leverage has done for me:

    yearend borrowings net worth Indicated annual dividends
    2007 $175K $1.1M $21K
    2008 300K $800K $19K
    2009 $300K $1.2M $26K
    today $400K $2.1M $70K

    Commentary… In 2007 leverage was at under 20% of new worth and it is the same way today. I don’t expand my leverage when things are going well, I want to be able to survive the next 50% crash. Through 2008 I expanded my leverage on the way down as I did not know where the trough would be, but I had to start fishing somewhere. Some buys were early, some were spectacular. At the worst of it, I had no more borrowing capacity, so I used a different currency, I sold stuff that fell 50% and bought stuff that sold off 70, 90%. I also note that today one stock is responsible for $18K dividends and it might not last, but even $52K still looks good to me in the dividends sequence.

    It is interesting how my borrowing of $400K backed by 2 dozen mostly blue chip stocks purchased lowish paying annually about 6 times the interest expense in dividends is deemed risky by most people when the next guy borrows the same $400K to buy a single house highish it is deemed a perfectly sound idea by many (most?). The truth is that a basket of stocks is safer than a single house and that it is not the house that makes you money in RE, it is the oversized leverage. Imagine the fun I could have had if I could have borrowed at 5% down 15 years ago and not had the loan callable?

  11. Sean Cooper, Financial Journalist on October 31, 2014 at 8:46 pm

    Bruce Sellery hit the nail on the head – people are all about the upside and forget there’s a nasty downside – your investment could tank and you’d still owe the money to the bank. While I considering borrowing a good idea for buying a home and education, I don’t consider investing good debt.

  12. Kally on September 26, 2015 at 4:47 am

    I think borrowing to invest is a mixed bag. From a tax perspective the interest is deductible against the income earned which obviously reduces taxes on the investment income. On the other hand, as noted above lots of people have a hard time staying invested during a downturn without borrowing – how many of these people are able to hang on and ride out a market downturn if the investments were purchased using borrowed money?

  13. Jason M on July 24, 2019 at 10:57 am

    I used to be dead set against using margin, but as I developed, and became successful with and increasingly confident in my “value investing” skills, my attitude toward borrowing on margin gradually became more favourable. I try to find 3-4 diversified stocks priced at 40% of my estimate of value, in order to ensure a large “margin of safety.” I’ll put up 1/2 on stocks marginable at 30%, and 2/3 on stocks marginable at 50%. I don’t borrow against my paper profits. It’s working out well thus far.

    I see leverage as a tool, and as with any tool, there is a right way and a wrong way to use it. There is no question that if you can’t make money in stocks without margin, you’re not going to make any with margin, furthermore, too much leverage is dangerous no matter how good of an investor you are; but I think it is false to suggest that regardless of who manages it, an unleveraged portfolio is always less risky than a leveraged one. Some people are simply better at stock investing than others.

Leave a Comment

Join More Than 10,000 Subscribers!

Sign up now and get our free e-Book- Financial Management by the Decade - plus new financial tips and money stories delivered to your inbox every week.