Short-Let vs Long-Let: Which Earns More for UK Property Owners?

One of the most common questions we get from new clients is whether short-let management actually earns more than a traditional long-term tenancy. The short answer is yes — but the gap is wider than most people expect.

We analysed rental income data across 200 properties on our portfolio over a 12-month period, comparing actual short-let earnings against average long-term rental valuations for the same properties. The results were consistent across regions and property types.

The Numbers

On average, properties managed through Daisy Bee Property earned 47% more via short-let than they would have achieved through a standard 12-month tenancy. In high-demand locations such as the Cotswolds, Lake District, and coastal Cornwall, that premium rose to over 80%.

• Average long-let yield: £1,100/month
• Average short-let yield (managed): £1,620/month
• Peak season premium: up to 3x nightly rates vs. long-let equivalent
• Occupancy rate across managed portfolio: 74% year-round

What About the Costs?

Short-let management does carry higher operational costs than a long-let tenancy. Housekeeping, linen, consumables, and guest communication all add up. This is precisely why professional management matters — at Daisy Bee, our management fee covers all of these services from 12%, meaning your net yield is still substantially higher than the long-let equivalent.

When Long-Let Makes More Sense

Short-let is not right for every property or every owner. If you live overseas and need a guaranteed monthly income regardless of occupancy, or if your property is in a location with very low tourist demand, a long-term tenancy may offer greater certainty. We always give honest advice based on your property's specific location, size, and your personal circumstances.

If you would like a personalised income projection for your property, get in touch. We provide free estimates based on comparable properties in your area — with no obligation.