Capital appreciation scenarios
for GNW luxury.

Many real-estate research notes present a single CAGR — "we expect 12% per annum" — without surfacing the distribution of outcomes around that number. This desk treats that practice as analytically lazy and commercially irresponsible. A five-year CAGR is a projection with a wide confidence interval, driven by identifiable events whose outcomes are uncertain. Presenting only the mid-point implies certainty that the desk does not have.

We therefore publish three scenarios — bull, base, bear — each with its own event path, its own CAGR, and its own probability weight. A reader who is more risk-averse than our central case can weight toward the bear. A reader who is more optimistic about infrastructure timing can weight toward the bull. Either choice is defensible. Presenting only one of them would be misleading.

For the conceptual frame this sits in, the capital appreciation glossary entry defines the terms we use — nominal vs real CAGR, compounded vs simple, and the difference between price-per-sq-ft appreciation and per-unit appreciation after dilution adjustments.

Our desk-weighted probabilities are 25% bull, 55% base, 20% bear. These weights are not model output — they are analyst judgement, refreshed quarterly, and we publish them so that readers can replace them with their own weights. Using ours, the probability-weighted expected 5-year CAGR is 13.3%, implying cumulative return of roughly 87% from the Q1 2026 entry. Adding a 2.76% net rental yield over the same period lifts the gross total return closer to 100% cumulative before taxes.

That headline number — roughly a doubling of capital over five years on a probability-weighted basis — is the foundation of the desk's constructive stance on the GNW luxury band. It is not a guarantee. A reader who weights more heavily to the bear case can easily see 50–60% cumulative. The desk's job is to publish the scenarios and the weights transparently enough that the reader can make that adjustment themselves.