← All scenarios

By Kulasekar Mittapalli · Scenario · Last reviewed August 3, 2026

Monthly Payment on a $400,000 House with 20% Down

A $400,000 home with 20% down is the textbook scenario — the down payment that avoids mortgage insurance entirely, at the cost of a much larger amount of cash upfront.

The real payment breakdown

Includes estimated tax and insurance ($4,800/year tax, $1,400/year insurance). Use the calculator below, pre-filled with these numbers, to swap in your real figures.

What 20% down actually buys you

Compare this to the same $400,000 home at 10% down: the loan would be $40,000 larger, and PMI would add roughly $167/mo indefinitely until the balance dropped to 78% of the original value. Reaching 20% down upfront isn't just a bigger check at closing — it's a permanently lower payment from day one.

What income actually supports this payment

Using the 28% front-end rule, a $2,539/mo payment implies household income around $108,800/year — before other debts are factored in under the full 36% back-end DTI rule.

What a rate change does to this specific loan

The 15-year alternative, run on these exact numbers

A 15-year term on this $320,000 loan raises principal and interest to about $2,788/mo, but cuts total lifetime interest from $408,142 to $181,758 — a savings of $226,385.

Try it with your own rate and numbers

The calculator below is pre-filled with this exact scenario.

What $80,000 buys beyond skipping PMI

Avoiding mortgage insurance is the headline benefit of 20% down, and it's the smallest of the three benefits that actually apply.

The second is pricing. Conventional loans carry risk-based adjustments tied to loan-to-value, and the 80% threshold is where those adjustments largely disappear. The rate you're quoted at 20% down is typically better than the same borrower's rate at 10% down — separate from and in addition to the PMI savings.

The third is competitive standing. In a market with multiple offers, a 20%-down conventional offer reads as lower risk to a seller than a minimum-down FHA offer. It signals reserves, it implies fewer appraisal complications, and it's less likely to fall apart. That advantage doesn't appear in any payment calculation but it decides which offer gets accepted.

The opportunity cost nobody quantifies

Eighty thousand dollars in a house is eighty thousand dollars not invested elsewhere. Over thirty years that difference compounds into a genuinely large number, and the honest version of the 20%-down argument has to acknowledge it.

The counterargument is that the comparison is rarely clean. Money not spent on a down payment doesn't reliably go into an index fund — it goes into a car, a renovation, or simply gets absorbed. Forced savings through home equity has behavioral value that a spreadsheet comparison ignores.

The version of this that holds up: if you have the discipline to actually invest the difference and your mortgage rate is low, a smaller down payment plus disciplined investing has a strong case. If your rate is high or the money would leak, 20% down is the better real-world outcome even if it's the worse theoretical one.

Where this scenario sits in the market

A $400,000 purchase with $80,000 down describes a buyer with meaningful accumulated savings — typically either a repeat buyer rolling equity from a prior home, or a first-time buyer who saved deliberately for several years.

For the repeat buyer, the relevant risk is timing: selling and buying in the same market means the price you gain on the sale you give back on the purchase. For the first-time buyer, the relevant risk is depletion — arriving at closing having spent the entire reserve to reach the 20% threshold. In both cases the down payment percentage is less important than what remains behind it.