Valuation check: 185 m² condo in Vienna, asking €354,200

My main constraint is the evidence: there is one completed transaction, while the other three comparisons are still only asking prices.

The property is a 5-bed Vienna condo of roughly 185 m², offered at €354,200 and in average condition. The area and daylight are appealing, but the interior is older and there may be energy-related work ahead. I have assumed no appreciation in the base case.

I am wary of applying the smaller units’ full per-m² rate across all 185 m². Would you use a lower marginal rate for the additional floor area, then price cosmetic updating separately from windows, heating or other building-level work?

Parking and the remaining lease term are still unconfirmed. I also need the address, floor, condition and other particulars of the completed sale before it can anchor the valuation. Those verifiable points come before a local appraisal, since parking or a short lease could matter more than any reversible choice of finishes.

The asking price is roughly €1,915 per m², but I would work outward from the completed sale rather than average all four comparables. If the others are smaller, I might initially test a 5–15% lower per-m² figure for this unit’s size. For dated condition, perhaps another 10–20%, but only after separating cosmetic work from windows, heating and other major items.

The missing fact for me is the precise micro-location, followed closely by the details of that completed sale. Was it in the same building or genuinely nearby, with similar light, floor level and condition? “Vienna” is too broad for the sale to anchor the valuation unless those points line up.

I would not apply zlam’s condition percentage as a blanket deduction. Two dated flats can have completely different costs. One may need surfaces and fittings; another may face expensive energy-related work. Ask for the current service charges, what they include, and whether significant building expenditure is anticipated. Those recurring and near-term costs could change the offer more than the finishes.

Also clarify the ownership or lease structure and, if a lease is involved, its remaining length and terms. That is potentially more important than fine-tuning a floor-area adjustment. A large unit at a low headline price is not necessarily cheap if the tenure limits its value or financing options.

I agree that the completed transaction deserves the most weight, but one sale can still mislead. Check whether it included parking or outdoor space. Either can distort a simple price-per-m² comparison, particularly if your condo has neither. The three asking comparables are useful mainly for showing the current competition, not what buyers have actually paid.

I would make a small comparison grid rather than choose one adjustment rate: interior area, exact location, floor/light, condition, outdoor space, parking, tenure and service charges. Start with the completed sale, adjust each difference separately, then use the asking listings as an upper-bound sense check. Keep an unadjusted column too, so assumptions do not quietly compound into a false level of precision.

One more caveat: five bedrooms across 185 m² may appeal to a narrower buyer group than a more conventional layout, depending on room sizes and circulation. I would want the floor plan before assuming the area deserves the same per-m² value as smaller comparables. The formal appraiser should be asked to explain the comparable selection and adjustments, not just provide a final number.