The Tre Ver: Three Buyers Paid Below Our Limit. Here’s What Happened Next.
This backtest asks a simple question: if we had analysed The Tre Ver at launch, could buyers actually find units below our maximum price — and did those units hold up well a few years later?
This is a look back using our current method on old transactions. We did not publish these recommendations at the time. We first work out what we would have been willing to pay using information available then. Only after that do we look at what happened later.
The simple result
We found three exact 614 sq ft units bought below our historical maximum price of about S$937,000.
Those buyers later made about 18.8%, 26.2% and 30.8% over roughly 3.6 to 4.6 years.
All three cleared our minimum 5% appreciation test.
1. What Was The Tre Ver Like at Launch?
The Tre Ver was a 99-year project in Potong Pasir. Historical launch information showed land cost of about S$797 psf ppr. Launch-day prices were broadly around S$1,550 to S$1,600 psf.
The important point for us was not whether the project looked attractive. It was whether certain units were priced low enough to give buyers some protection if the market did not rise quickly.
A good project can still be a poor buy if the price is too high. A fair project can become a good investment if the price is low enough.
2. What Was the Most We Would Have Paid?
For the 614 sq ft units in this test, our historical calculation gave a value of about S$1.031 million.
We would not pay the full calculated value. We require a safety cushion. After that cushion, our maximum purchase price was about:
S$937,351 for a 614 sq ft unit.
In everyday terms: if the unit was below about S$937,000, we would be interested. If it was above that, we would walk away or negotiate.
3. Did Buyers Actually Get a Chance to Buy Below That Price?
Yes. We found three exact units bought below our maximum.
| Unit | Purchase Price | Our Maximum | Would We Buy? |
|---|---|---|---|
| 614 sq ft unit #04-02 | S$886,000 | ~S$937,351 | YES |
| 614 sq ft unit #07-02 | S$901,000 | ~S$937,351 | YES |
| 614 sq ft unit #06-07 | S$902,000 | ~S$937,351 | YES |
This is important because the backtest is not based on an average project price. These were real individual transactions that buyers could actually have purchased.
4. What Happened to the First Unit?
Unit #04-02 was bought for S$886,000. About 3.8 years later it sold for S$1.118 million.
5. What Happened to the Second Unit?
Unit #07-02 was bought for S$901,000. About 3.6 years later it sold for S$1.070 million.
6. What Happened to the Third Unit?
Unit #06-07 was bought for S$902,000. About 4.6 years later it sold for S$1.180 million.
7. Why This Backtest Is Useful
All three buyers paid different prices, but each one stayed below our maximum. All three later made money within our normal 3–5 year checking period.
That does not prove every cheap-looking unit will work. It shows that, in this case, buying with a reasonable safety cushion lined up with good later results.
| Unit | Time Held | Price Gain | Backtest Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| #04-02 | ~3.8 years | +26.2% | PASS |
| #07-02 | ~3.6 years | +18.8% | PASS |
| #06-07 | ~4.6 years | +30.8% | PASS |
8. Does This Mean Every Tre Ver Unit Was a Good Buy?
No.
Later research found two smaller 495 sq ft units bought at around S$1,667 to S$1,713 psf. Those prices were above what our model was prepared to pay. Their later gains were only around 9%.
They still made money, but the result was weaker than the three 614 sq ft units above.
The lesson is not “buy The Tre Ver.” The lesson is “buy the right unit at the right price.”
9. What We Learned
The three exact units below our price limit all produced useful gains.
We look at the actual unit size and total purchase price, because that affects both affordability and future resale demand.
Some units in the same project can be good buys while others are simply too expensive.
The result adds evidence, but we still need many more projects, including failures and missed opportunities.
10. Final Result
PASS
Three exact 614 sq ft purchases were below our historical maximum price. All three later gained more than 5% within roughly 3–5 years.
The strongest result was about +30.8%. The other two gained about +26.2% and +18.8%.
This analysis is retrospective. It does not mean AskAnnaLee recommended these units in 2018 or 2019. The aim is to test whether our current buying rules would have made sensible decisions when applied to old transactions. Past results do not guarantee future results.
The Tre Ver launch information and starting prices:
EdgeProp — The Tre Ver preview
Exact transaction evidence used in the internal matched-unit audit:
PropertyNoob — The Tre Ver sales
PropertyNoob — The Tre Ver profitability
Price first. Project second.
The Tre Ver is a good example of why we do not simply ask, “Is this a good condo?” We ask a more useful question: “At this particular price, is this particular unit worth buying?”