Before You Tie Up More Cash Than Necessary, Accept a Jumbo That Was Never Required, or Weaken Your Position in a Competitive Market.
No fluff. No imagery of flags. No "thank you for your service."
Just structure.
Before you read another word, make sure this is actually for you.
Most lenders talk to you about rates and fees. That's the wrong conversation.
At $1M+, you are not choosing between loan products. You are designing how capital flows in and out of a significant asset — and the wrong structure is expensive, illiquid, and hard to unwind.
The first question most lenders ask is: "What's the rate?"
The first question you should be asking is:
There are three variables that actually matter at this level. Not rate. Not monthly payment. These:
How much cash are you locking into non-performing equity — and what does that cost you over 10 years?
How will a listing agent and seller perceive your financing? Structure is a competitive tool.
What does the full picture look like over a 7–10 year horizon, including investment opportunity cost?
Every section of this playbook runs through those three lenses. If your advisor isn't doing the same, you're missing most of the decision.
This is the sentence that costs high-income VA buyers the most money. And it's often said reflexively — not analytically.
Here's what's actually happening when a lender says "you'll probably need jumbo" above conforming limits:
The problem is, most buyers can't tell the difference. And most lenders don't explain it.
When jumbo truly is required, this playbook shows you when — and how to evaluate it clearly. When it's being defaulted to out of convenience, you'll know what to do about it.
This is the emotional core of every $1M+ purchase decision. And most buyers make it based on comfort, not analysis.
Putting 20% down on a $1.5M home means wiring $300,000 to closing. That money immediately becomes non-performing equity — locked in a house, earning a return defined entirely by appreciation.
Meanwhile, that same $300,000 invested in the S&P 500 at a 10% average annual return compounds to roughly $778,000 over ten years.
That's not an argument against down payments. It's an argument for modeling them — instead of defaulting to what feels like the "responsible" move.
There is no universally correct answer. There are three rational positions — and only one of them is based on actual analysis of your situation.
Use VA or low-down structure to preserve liquidity and keep capital deployed in higher-returning assets. Best when: investment returns exceed carry cost of debt and you have strong income continuity.
Split the difference — enough down to strengthen the offer or reduce monthly exposure, while preserving meaningful capital. Best when: competitive market dynamics require demonstrating equity commitment.
Intentionally reduce leverage for psychological comfort, monthly cash flow, or specific debt-to-income structures. Best when: liquidity is abundant, income is variable, or the market warrants it.
The right lane depends on your income, existing assets, investment philosophy, and specific property. None of them are wrong — but choosing one without modeling the others is.
No cheerleading. No bias toward any product. Here's when each structure actually makes sense.
| VA Loan | Jumbo | Physician Loan | Cash | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Liquidity Impact | Minimal — low/no down | Moderate — 10–20% typically required | Low — physician programs often 0–10% | Maximum — full purchase price tied up |
| Offer Strength | Depends on positioning & market | Generally well-received by sellers | Similar to conventional | Strongest possible position |
| Key Advantage | No PMI, residual income underwriting, 0% down | Straightforward above conforming limits, seller familiarity | No funding fee, student loan flexibility, low down | Eliminates financing contingency entirely |
| Key Risk | VA stigma in competitive markets, appraisal dynamics | Higher cash to close, pricing spread vs. VA | Relationship pricing pressure, less competitive rates | Locks all equity immediately, eliminates leverage |
| Best When | Liquidity is priority, strong residual income, rate competitive | Funding fee exceeds benefit, property has MPR issues, VA not viable structurally | Early-career physician, no VA eligibility, meaningful relationship pricing | Liquidity event imminent, competitive bidding requires it, intent to refi shortly |
Steering happens quietly. It usually sounds reasonable. Here's how to recognize it.
Steering doesn't require bad intent. It often happens because lenders have systems built around certain products, and it's genuinely easier for them to route your file through jumbo than to structure a VA loan above conforming limits correctly.
This can cost you tens of thousands of dollars — in higher fees, different pricing, or more cash tied up at closing — without you ever knowing the alternative existed.
VA financing at $1M+ is not weak. Weak positioning is weak. There's a difference.
Sellers and listing agents make decisions based on perceived risk. The goal isn't to hide that you're using VA — it's to demonstrate that your financing is as solid as any conventional offer on the table.
These seven elements, when in place before your offer goes in, change that perception meaningfully.
Not a pre-qualification letter. A fully underwritten approval where income, assets, and credit have been verified — not estimated. This removes the largest source of listing agent anxiety.
VA underwriting uses residual income — not just DTI — as the key quality metric. A one-page summary showing your residual income position demonstrates you're not a borderline approval.
Most VA appraisal anxiety comes from uncertainty. Know the Tidewater Initiative process before you submit. Know the ROV (Reconsideration of Value) success rate. Have a plan before the listing agent raises the concern.
Delays cost deals. Having a clear closing timeline — and a lender who communicates proactively with the listing agent throughout — signals professionalism and reduces seller risk perception.
Every unnecessary condition or contingency introduces friction. The structure of your offer should be as clean as possible — not draped in protective clauses that signal buyer uncertainty.
Your buyer's agent needs language to use when the listing agent raises VA concerns. This isn't spin — it's accurate information about appraisal success rates, buyer financial strength, and lender experience, delivered before doubt takes hold.
Listing agents lose confidence when they can't reach the lender. A lender who is reachable, responsive, and willing to talk directly with the listing agent removes one of the most common reasons sellers choose conventional over VA.
If you can't answer these clearly, you're not ready to close.
This playbook covers the framework. A private structure review covers your specific numbers, your market, and your timeline.
If you're buying at $1M+ and want clarity before you commit — on whether jumbo is actually required, how your offer will be perceived, and what the full financial picture looks like — request a review.