Barranco vs Surco: which is the better rental investment in Lima? (2026)

Let's keep this simple. On long-term rentals, Barranco nets 3.7% and Surco 3.6%. That's a rounding error, not a reason to buy. Anyone telling you a tenth of a percent decides your investment is selling you something.

The real gap is the entry price. Barranco's median is $2,529/m², Surco's is $1,779/m². That's about 42% more per square meter in Barranco for essentially the same long-term yield. You're paying a premium and getting the same rent-to-price ratio back.

On Airbnb, the order flips: Surco grosses 1.7% versus Barranco's 1.5%. Note these are gross figures, so they don't account for cleaning, management, furnishing or vacancy, and both are well below the long-term numbers. I wouldn't lean on either short-term figure to justify a purchase.

So who wins? On the headline long-term yield, Barranco, barely. But given you pay 42% more per square meter for that same 3.7% versus 3.6%, Surco is the more efficient use of capital, and it also leads on gross Airbnb. Barranco's premium presumably buys you something the yield doesn't capture, location, resale demand, but this data doesn't measure that.

I'd call Surco the better value on these numbers, with the caveat that the yields are close and the Airbnb figures are gross and thin. Not investment advice, just the arithmetic.

Related: Barranco · Surco · Lima Yield Index