Extra payment on a loan: shorten the term or lower the instalment
Your data
This assumes the fixed instalment arrangement, where every payment is the same and the split between interest and principal moves over time. Everything is worked out in closed form rather than month by month, so a long term does not accumulate rounding.
Results
| Instalment before the extra payment | — |
| Balance owed on that month | — |
| Balance after the extra payment | — |
| Months still to pay if you shorten the term | — |
| What shortening the term saves in total | — |
| Instalment if you lower it instead | — |
| What lowering the instalment saves in total | — |
| Gap between the two, in money never paid | — |
| What either one saves in today's money | — |
The last row is the one that settles the argument, and it is computed rather than asserted. Bring both futures back to the day of the extra payment at the contract's own rate and each of them is worth exactly what you paid in. Not roughly, not nearly: to the cent, for any amount and any month.
So the enormous gap in the row above it is calendar and not money. Shortening the term stops payments that were going to happen far away, and money far away is worth less; lowering the instalment gives a little back every month starting now. The totals differ because they are added up at different distances, not because one of them found value the other missed.
The same extra payment, made at different times
| Month of the extra payment | Saved in total, shortening the term | Worth that day |
|---|
Read the two columns against each other. The middle one falls away as the years pass, from a headline figure early on to a modest one late, and the right hand one does not move at all. Every row is the same amount of money doing the same job; only the number of future payments it cancels changes.
That does not make paying early pointless. It makes the reason for it something other than the saving: an earlier payment removes more months of owing, and owing has consequences that no discount rate captures, from what happens if income stops to what else the debt prevents you from doing.
There is one number here that is a rate rather than a total, and it is the one worth carrying away: an extra payment earns exactly the interest rate of the contract, with no tax and no uncertainty. Whether to make it at all is a comparison against what the same money would earn elsewhere, after tax, and never against the headline saving, which is not a rate at all.
Which of the two to choose is then a question about your month rather than your arithmetic. Lowering the instalment buys room in the budget now; shortening the term buys an earlier end. They cost the same, so pick the one whose risk you would rather carry.
Is it better to shorten the term or lower the instalment?
Neither, in money. Bring both futures back to the day of the extra payment at the contract's own rate and each is worth exactly what you paid in, to the cent, for any amount and any month.
The headline totals differ enormously because they are added up at different distances in time. Shortening cancels payments that were far away; lowering gives a little back every month starting now.
Then why does one of them save so much more?
Because a total ignores when the money moves. With the figures this page starts from, shortening saves 309,388 and lowering saves 65,421, and the gap of 243,967 is entirely calendar.
The same trap appears when comparing the two repayment systems: a bigger nominal saving is not a bigger saving once the contract's own rate is applied to it.
Does it matter when I make the extra payment?
For the headline figure, hugely: the same money saves 353,588 in the first month and 47,813 in the two hundred and fortieth. For what it is worth on the day, not at all.
That does not make paying early pointless. It moves the reason: an earlier payment removes more months of owing, and owing carries consequences that no discount rate is measuring.
| Month of the extra payment | Saved in total, shortening the term | Worth that day |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | 353.587,72 | 30.000,00 |
| 24 | 309.388,42 | 30.000,00 |
| 60 | 246.263,02 | 30.000,00 |
| 120 | 158.726,62 | 30.000,00 |
| 240 | 47.813,18 | 30.000,00 |
So should I make the extra payment at all?
That is a comparison this page can frame but not settle. An extra payment earns exactly the interest rate of the contract, guaranteed and with no tax, and the question is whether the same money would earn more elsewhere after tax.
What it should never be compared against is the headline saving, which is a total rather than a rate and is not measuring what it appears to measure.
Reactions
0
0 Comments
Be the first to comment