Ulaganje u nekretnine za najam: koliko se isplati?
Hrvoje Vargić6 min čitanjaUz štednju u banci, ulaganje u nekretnine je najpopularniji način ulaganja među Hrvatima. Nekretnine se smatraju sigurnom investicijom. Posjedovati stan opipljivije je nego posjedovati dionicu.
Niske kamatne stope i rastuća inflacija u zadnje vrijeme potiču mnoge da čuvaju novac kupnjom nekretnine. No, koliko je to isplativo?
Ulaganje u nekretnine - prednosti i nedostaci
Jedna od glavnih prednosti ulaganja u nekretnine je zaštita od inflacije. Trenutno inflacija postaje sve veća. To bi moglo potrajati. Što je inflacija veća, novac brže gubi na vrijednosti. No, isto se ne događa s nekretninama. Rastom cijena većinom raste i cijena nekretnina.
Druga prednost je dugoročni rast (aprecijacija) vrijednosti. Prema podacima HNB-a, od početka 2002. do kraja 2020. vrijednost nekretnina je prosječno u Hrvatskoj rasla 4,5%. Naravno, postoje razlike u regijama. Dok su cijene nekretnina u Zagrebu i na obali rasle i više, drugdje to nije bio slučaj.
Postoje i nedostaci. Prvi je nelikvidnost. Nekretninu ne možeš uvijek lako prodati ako ti zatreba novac. Posjedovanje nekretnine može biti trošak kojeg se ne možeš lako riješiti.
Ako nekretninu kupuješ na kredit, postoji i rizik promjene kamatnih stopa. U zadnje vrijeme sve više slušamo kako slijedi razdoblje rasta kamatnih stopa. Dok većina banaka u početku daje fiksnu kamatnu stopu (najčešće do 5 g.), nakon tog razdoblja ona se može i drastično promijeniti. Veća promjena donosi veće troškove financiranja – dakle, manju isplativost.
Uvijek treba uračunati i rizik nepopunjenosti. Jednostavno rečeno, možda nekretninu nećeš moći iznajmiti svih 12 mjeseci u godini. Svaki mjesec nepopunjenosti donosi manju isplativost.
Konačno, prihodi od iznajmljivanja se računaju po jednostavnoj kamatnoj stopi. Dok ćeš kod drugih vrsta ulaganja dobivati „kamatu na kamatu“ koja će se vremenom povećavati, to nije slučaj kod prihoda od najma.
Kako izračunati isplativost ulaganja u nekretnine?
Ekonomisti isplativost ulaganja računaju povratom na investiciju – ROI (eng. return on investment). On se računa po sljedećoj formuli:
ROI = godišnji neto najam / ukupni trošak nabave nekretnine
Neto najam znači da od ukupnog najma trebaš oduzeti troškove održavanja. To ljudi često zanemare. Troškovi održavanja uključuju popravke, kupnju dotrajale bijele tehnike i namještaja, ličenje zidova i sl.
Dakle, ako godišnje zaradiš 5000 EUR od iznajmljivanja, to nije tvoj neto prihod. Ako ne možeš procijeniti troškove održavanja, možeš ih računati po stopi od 10% ukupnog najma (u ovom slučaju to bi bilo 500 EUR godišnje). Tek kad njih oduzmeš, dobiješ neto prihod.
Ujedno, ukupni trošak nabave nekretnine nije samo kupoprodajna cijena. Tu treba uračunati i 3% poreza na promet nekretnina, troškove kupnje (javni bilježnik i sl.) te troškove uređenja.
Recimo do kupuješ stan od 50 m2 po cijeni od 2000 EUR po m2. Radi jednostavnosti, troškove kupnje možeš računati po stopi od 0,5%, a troškove uređenja po stopi od 10% (ako stan ne treba renovirati, nego samo opremiti i urediti). Cijena temeljite renovacije može ići i do 500 EUR po m2.
Ako mjesečno iznajmljuješ stan za 450 EUR, troškovi održavanja od 10% iznosit će 540 EUR godišnje. Izračun tada izgleda ovako:
Prema ovom izračunu, iznajmljivanje nekretnine bi donosilo povrat od 4,28% godišnje. To nije loše, ali je manje od nekih drugih ulaganja (npr. indeks S&P 500 je od 1950. ostvarivao prosječno 11.53% godišnjeg prinosa). Ako uračunaš inflaciju, isplativost se još više smanjuje.
Opreza radi, dobro je izračunati i što se dogodi ako stan ne bude popunjen 25% vremena u godini. Tada isplativost pada na 3,21% (prije računanja efekta inflacije).
Ono što u oba slučaja nije uračunato je aprecijacija vrijednosti. Prosječan rast cijena stambenih nekretnina u posljednjih dvadesetak godina bio je 4,5%. Taj postotak treba pribrojiti ROI-ju od najma. Tada prinosi i nakon inflacije postaju respektabilni.
(Radi jednostavnosti, možeš računati da je aprecijacija jednaka inflaciji pa ti je realni povrat jednak onome što dobiješ u gornjoj tablici.)
Isplati li se dizati kredit?
Prethodni izračun temeljen je na pretpostavci da nekretninu kupuješ gotovinom. No, što ako nemaš potrebni iznos u gotovini – je li isplativo dignuti kredit?
U tom slučaju, banka će često tražiti određeni polog. Ako polog iznosi 20%, trebat će ti kredit u iznosu od 90.800 EUR. Efektivna kamatna stopa (EKS) koju u ovom trenutku možeš dobiti kreće se oko 3% godišnje. Ako kredit digneš na 30 godina, godišnja rata će iznositi 4.594 EUR. Taj iznos trebaš oduzeti od godišnjeg neto najma.
ROI se ovdje računa ponešto drugačije:
ROI = godišnji neto prihod/ visina depozita
Neto prihod je neto najam umanjen za ratu kredita. No, taj iznos se ne računa u odnosu na cijeli trošak nabave nego samo na visinu depozita. Tvoj ulog je samo svoj depozit, a ostatak ti je posudila banka. Ovako izgleda izračun:
U ovom slučaju povrat pada na 1,17% (manje od inflacije), a kod slabije popunjenosti je u minusu. Čak i kad se uračuna aprecijacija, povrat nije prevelik ni kod pune popunjenosti.
Diverzifikacija
Jedan od glavnih principa ulaganja je diverzifikacija. Drugim riječima, ne treba sva jaja stavljati u istu košaru jer ako košara padne – sva jaja će se razbiti. To znači da ulaganja treba rasporediti po različitim instrumentima (dionicama, obveznicama itd.), tržištima, valutama, sektorima itd. To vrijedi i za ulaganje u nekretnine.
Diverzifikacija štiti vrijednost glavnice od gubitka vrijednosti.
Jedan od najvećih problema malih ulagača je da cijelo ulaganje usmjere u istu stvar. Mnogi svu štednju stavljaju u nekretnine. To je problem jer ulaganje nije diverzificirano. Pomisli samo na nedavni potres. Potres isti dan može prepoloviti vrijednost nekretnine. Da se zaštitiš od toga, dobro je imati ulaganja i u drugim instrumentima.
No, to ne znači (još) da trebaš odustati od ulaganja u nekretnine. Ako nemaš dovoljno novca da uz kupnju nekretnine uložiš i u druge instrumente, postoji način. To su ETF-ovi (eng. Exchange Traded Funds) koji ulažu u nekretnine (tzv. REIT - Real Estate Investment Trusts).
Umjesto da kupiš ciglu i beton, možeš kupiti dionice nekog ETF-a koji ulaže u nekretnine diljem svijeta. Neto prihodi i aprecijacija tih nekretnina će povećavati vrijednost tvog ulaganja, a nećeš morati sav novac staviti u nekretnine. To možeš već i s nekoliko stotina eura. Npr. ako imaš 5.000 EUR za ulaganje, možeš za 2.000 EUR kupiti dionice nekretninskog ETF-a, a ostatak uložiti u dioničke i obvezničke ETF-ove. Time ćeš iskoristiti prednosti ulaganja u nekretnine, a ujedno postići diverzifikaciju.
Zaključak: isplati li se ulaganje u nekretnine?
Gornji izračuni pokazali su ti kako možeš samostalno izračunati isplativost ulaganja u nekretnine. Kad znaš način, možeš mijenjati različite parametre ovisno o stvarnoj situaciji. Parametri se mogu mijenjati (cijene, najam, kamatne stope) i prema tome će se mijenjati isplativost.
Ono što ne smiješ zaboraviti je oportunitetni trošak. To je samo komplicirani naziv koji ekonomisti koriste da bi izrazili nešto vrlo jednostavno. Pitanje nije samo koliki povrat nosi ulaganje u nekretnine, nego i možeš li za isti novac dobiti bolji povrat nekim drugim ulaganjem. Povrat od 6% može biti dobar, ali nije toliko dobar ako se usporedi s povratom od 8%. U tom slučaju propuštaš povrat od 2% godišnje, što na dugi rok može iznositi jako puno.
Prinos je uvijek funkcija rizika i tu nema alternativne. Što ulaganje nosi veći očekivani povrat, to će biti rizičnije. Zato je za male ulagače najbolji pristup uvijek isti: ulaganje na dugi rok, diverzifikacija i pasivni pristup ulaganju.
_______________________
Želiš saznati više o prednostima i nedostacima različitih vrsta ulaganja?
Prijavi se na naše edukacije i saznaj sve o ulaganju koje vodi do financijskog uspjeha.
Još s bloga
Sve objave
Čitanje u svakoj dobi: kako ponovno pronaći vrijeme za knjigu?
Koliko si puta rekao da nemaš vremena za čitanje? Knjiga čeka na polici, ti pogledaš naslovnicu i pomisliš: „Pročitat ću je kad uhvatim malo vremena.
More Than Money: Why Financial Literacy Is a Democratic Competence
Reflections from the Financial and Economic Literacy NECE Lab, Vienna, 27–28 April 2026 When we talk about financial literacy, most people picture budgeting apps, savings accounts, and the fine print on a loan agreement. Useful things, but a narrow picture. Increasingly, educators, researchers, and policymakers across Europe are making a bigger claim: understanding money is not only a personal survival skill. It is a foundation of active citizenship and democratic resilience. That claim was the beating heart of the Financial and Economic Literacy NECE Lab in Vienna, a two-day gathering hosted by THE CIVICS Innovation Hub together with Znanje na djelu and the Erste Financial Life Park (FLiP), with the support of ERSTE Foundation. We were proud to be part of it, having Magdalena Basić Alando actively participate and present our own project, Financial Literacy for Rural Youth, and learning alongside practitioners from across the continent. This post pulls together what the research actually says, and what we saw play out in the room. The problem: too many young people can't apply what they know Start with the evidence. In the OECD's most recent international assessment of 15-year-olds, released in 2024, the picture is sobering: across the 14 OECD countries assessed, 18% of students on average do not have basic proficiency in financial literacy, meaning they cannot apply their knowledge to real-life situations involving financial decisions. The gap is not evenly distributed. Socio-economically disadvantaged students are over-represented among low performers, which risks entrenching inequality as those students become adults. In other words, the young people who most need economic confidence are the ones least likely to be given it — a pattern that maps neatly onto who feels shut out of public life more broadly. There is a hopeful flip side. Financial literacy and positive financial behaviour are linked: students with stronger skills behave more responsibly with money and are more forward-looking, with high performers markedly more likely than low performers to save. Skills, attitudes, and behaviour move together — which is exactly why how we teach matters as much as what we teach. The bigger claim: financial literacy feeds democratic participation Here is where the Vienna conversation went beyond personal finance. One of the Lab's expert speakers was Anna Lo Prete of the University of Turin, whose research sits right at this intersection — and whose work is among the clearest evidence we have on the question. Lo Prete's cross-country analysis documents a positive association between political participation — measured by the number of citizens voting in national elections — and the awareness of the trade-offs behind private and public decisions that basic financial education captures. Crucially, this is not just correlation dressed up: empirical models that control for a large set of other determinants of voter turnout indicate that financial literacy continues to have a positive and causal impact on electoral participation. Why would that be? The logic is intuitive once you see it. Understanding some economics and finance helps citizens grasp the reasons behind public intervention and weigh the pros and cons of policy proposals and agendas. A voter who understands taxation, public budgets, inflation, and debt is simply better equipped to evaluate the promises on a ballot — and harder to mislead. The catch: financial literacy alone isn't enough It would be too easy to conclude "teach kids about compound interest and democracy takes care of itself." The research is more demanding than that — and this nuance came up repeatedly in Vienna's group work. A recurring critique in the academic literature is that much mainstream financial education quietly frames citizens as consumers rather than participants. One influential analysis argues that dominant financial literacy programmes can end up promoting a limited, consumerist form of civic engagement, and that what is really needed is a critical, emancipatory civic financial literacy for an engaged citizenry able to extend and protect more robust conceptions of freedom and democracy. Scholars working on integrative economic education put the point sharply: financial literacy without civic competence remains a merely reactive skill rather than a source of genuine political agency, which is why financial literacy and civic competences should be understood as parts of a single integrative concept of economic education. The two only reach their full value when taught together — money knowledge that can read the system, not just cope with it. Europe is building the scaffolding None of this is happening in a vacuum. The policy architecture is catching up with the research. In 2023 the European Commission and the OECD jointly published a Financial Competence Framework for Children and Youth in the European Union. It is not only about interest rates and risk: alongside the four core content areas — money and transactions, planning and managing finances, risk and reward, and the financial landscape — the framework deliberately integrates cross-cutting dimensions including digital finance, sustainable finance, entrepreneurship, and citizenship. Citizenship is written into the framework by design. On the civic side, the Council of Europe's Reference Framework of Competences for Democratic Culture exists precisely to equip young people with the competences needed to defend and promote human rights, democracy and the rule of law, to act as active citizens, and to live peacefully together with others. Read the two frameworks side by side and the overlap is obvious: critical thinking, informed decision-making, and the confidence to participate. What this looks like in practice: rural youth and economic autonomy This is the gap our own project set out to close, and the reason we were presenting it in Vienna. Financial Literacy for Rural Youth: Building Democratic Resilience Through Economic Empowerment merges financial and civic education for an audience usually left out of both: young people in rural areas, who are systematically underrepresented in programmes that tend to be urban-centred. Working with our partners, the project equips rural GenZ participants in Croatia and Belgium with practical competences: budgeting, saving, investing, planning; through gamified, peer-to-peer, blended learning adapted to rural digital realities. But the design goes a step past personal finance, exactly along the lines the research recommends. Participants learn to analyse economic policies, financial products, and media narratives about money, so they can resist manipulation and make informed civic choices. The premise is that economic dependency and exclusion are themselves barriers to democratic participation, and that when young people understand how taxation, public budgets, and economic policy shape their own lives, they engage more meaningfully in democratic processes. A transnational peer exchange between Croatian and Belgian participants adds a cross-cultural, shared-European dimension, a small counterweight to the polarisation that tends to follow economic marginalisation. The pilot trainings in Croatia are already complete, with workshops in Belgium still ahead. And the methodology is being built to outlast the project and be shared amongst all stakeholders. Where the formal and non-formal worlds meet If there was one moment in Vienna that made the abstract concrete, it was the guided tour of the Erste Financial Life Park (FLiP), FLiP turns financial education into something you can walk through and touch: interactive stations where visitors make real-feeling budgeting decisions and immediately see the consequences. It is a vivid rebuttal to the idea that money education has to be dry. A theme the NECE Lab kept returning to, and one the research underlines, is the relationship between formal schooling and non-formal education. Classrooms provide reach and legitimacy; non-formal initiatives like ours provide the agility to reach underserved groups, experiment with gamified and peer-led methods, and adapt fast. The most promising path forward is not one or the other, but connective tissue between them: school systems that borrow the energy of non-formal approaches, and civic organisations whose toolkits can be picked up and used inside classrooms. The takeaway The case made in Vienna, and backed by the evidence, is straightforward but consequential. Financial literacy is not merely about helping individuals stay solvent. Done well, paired with civic competence rather than reduced to consumer advice, it strengthens people's capacity to understand the systems they live in, to resist manipulation, and to participate in the democratic decisions that shape their economic lives. In an era of rising costs, growing inequality, and declining trust in institutions, that capacity is not a luxury. It is infrastructure for democracy. We left Vienna grateful to all speakers for the intellectual grounding; to our fellow educators for the knowledge exchange and the good company; to the organisers: THE CIVICS Innovation Hub, Znanje na djelu, Erste Financial Life Park, and ERSTE Foundation, FLiP centre. The next chapter is being written in rural classrooms and community halls across Europe. We're glad to be part of it. Sources OECD (2024), PISA 2022 Results (Volume IV): How Financially Smart Are Students?, OECD Publishing. Lo Prete, A. (2024), Political participation and financial education: Understanding personal and collective trade-offs for a better citizenship, Economics Letters / ScienceDirect. Lo Prete, A., Financial education: From better personal finance to improved citizenship, Journal of Financial Literacy and Wellbeing, Cambridge Core. Arthur, C. (2012), Financial Literacy Education for Citizens: What Kind of Responsibility, Equality and Engagement?, Citizenship, Social and Economics Education (SAGE). Integrative Economic Education to Combine Citizenship Education and Financial Literacy (ResearchGate). European Union / OECD (2023), Financial Competence Framework for Children and Youth in the European Union, OECD Publishing. Council of Europe, Reference Framework of Competences for Democratic Culture (RFCDC).
-1024x512.jpg&w=1200&q=75)
Životni skript: zašto ponavljaš iste obrasce i kako ih promijeniti?
Jesi li ikad primijetio/la da u različitim vezama završavaš s istim tipom problema? Ili da na poslu uvijek ulazi u istu vrstu sukoba --- bez obzira...
