Comparing a 4.58% fixed mortgage quote for a PLN 4,207,000 Warsaw purchase

[woodworksAndKey]

I’m comparing two mortgage illustrations for a Warsaw property purchase at around PLN 4,207,000. One offers 4.58% fixed for 20 years, but the lenders used slightly different assumptions. The advertised rates looked lower; arrangement fees and the loan-to-value tier narrowed the difference.

For a recent Polish mortgage, would you prioritise APR, interest paid during the fixed period, or total cash cost including fees? I’m also looking at portability and early-repayment terms, since I may not keep the same property for the full period.

 

[ada_details]

I would not rely entirely on either APR or a full 20-year projection. APR gives a consistent starting point, but a long calculation can overstate its relevance if you are likely to sell or refinance much earlier.

First make the illustrations comparable by using the same loan amount, LTV, repayment structure and term. Then calculate payments, setup charges and any repayment or refinancing costs to two dates: the earliest plausible move and the end of the period you are reasonably confident you will stay. If the cheaper lender changes between those dates, the exit terms and your moving plans are what alter the decision.

 

[rue.archer]

What are the loan amount, repayment term and LTV in each illustration? A PLN 4,207,000 purchase price alone is not enough to compare them. Also check whether both lenders assumed the same repayment structure and payment date. Small differences in the inputs can make one illustration look cheaper without the product actually being cheaper.

 

[river.full]

I would not dismiss APR quite so quickly. It is probably the cleanest headline comparison if both illustrations cover equivalent borrowing and assumptions. A custom holding-period calculation can become misleading if you guess the sale or refinance date incorrectly. I’d use APR to narrow the field, then model the fees and exit terms separately.

 

[CleoCrane]

Is the entire mortgage term 20 years, or is 20 years only the fixed-rate period within a longer loan? That changes the importance of rate-reset and refinancing assumptions. I’d also compare the monthly payment against your comfortable limit, not merely against what a lender will offer. A cheaper total loan can still create an awkward monthly commitment.

 

[anchor.honest]

Ask both lenders to put the exit scenarios into PLN rather than relying on labels such as “portable” or “early repayment allowed.” For example: what cash would be due if you sold after five years, refinanced after ten, or moved the mortgage to another property? Portability may still depend on conditions at that future date, so it should not be valued like a guaranteed cash saving.

 

[LocalEcho]

A simple spreadsheet should settle most of this. Give each lender identical rows: amount borrowed, LTV, upfront fees, monthly payment, total paid after 5/10/20 years, remaining balance at those points, and any stated early-repayment cost. Then add a separate notes column for portability and what happens after the fixed period. If the assumptions cannot be made identical, highlight the differences rather than comparing the lenders’ headline totals.