There’s no universal right answer here — it depends on your financial flexibility, the local market, and your risk tolerance. Selling first is generally the lower-risk financial option: you know exactly how much equity you have to work with, you’re not carrying two mortgages, and your offer on the next home isn’t contingent on a sale, which makes it more competitive. The tradeoff is logistical — you may need temporary housing or a rent-back arrangement if your next home isn’t ready to close on the same timeline.
Buying first offers more convenience — no temporary housing, no double move — but it requires either enough cash or income to qualify for two mortgages simultaneously, or a bridge loan to cover the gap. This approach carries more financial risk, particularly if your current home takes longer to sell than expected or sells for less than anticipated.
A middle-ground option is a contingent offer, where your purchase of the new home is contingent on selling your current one. This reduces financial risk but makes your offer less competitive in a seller’s market, since sellers often prefer offers without sale contingencies.
The right choice often comes down to current market conditions and your personal financial cushion. In a strong seller’s market, selling first can be attractive since homes often move quickly. If you have significant savings or home equity to draw on, buying first might make more sense to avoid the disruption of two moves. Talking through your specific numbers with an agent and lender before deciding will clarify which path actually fits your situation.