Illustrative example — not a real property or client.
Go Far STR Intelligence
STR Performance Review
Juniper Hollow Cottage — fictional lakeside market
1.Executive Summary
Juniper Hollow Cottage recorded $47,800 of accommodation revenue across the 10 months with owner records, with occupancy of 71.2% and an average daily rate of about $228 across the same 10 months. Two months (December and April) have no records and are excluded rather than counted as zero.
June–August occupancy (88.6% combined) is well above the 64% illustrative market figure, but January and February occupancy (45.2% and 53.6%) is well below it. The three opportunities below focus on winter demand, the listing's first photos, and a minimum-stay rule that appears to block short midweek stays.
2.Property and Operating Snapshot
- Property
- Juniper Hollow Cottage (fictional)
- Property type
- Single family
- Bedrooms / bathrooms
- 3 / 2
- Guest capacity
- 8
- Management
- Self-managed
- Operating since
- Spring 2023
- Major amenities (owner-reported)
- Hot tub, fire pit, kayaks, lake access (shared)
- Owner's primary concern
- Low occupancy, Nightly rates
Owner-provided details.
A self-managed 3-bedroom, 2-bathroom cottage sleeping 8, operating since spring 2023. The owner reports a hot tub, fire pit, kayaks and shared lake access.
3.Historical Performance
Accommodation revenue (months passing checks)
$47,800
Occupancy (verified months)
71.2%
Average daily rate
$228
- Revenue: $47,800 accommodation revenue and 210 booked nights across 10 month(s) passing checks: Sep 2025, Oct 2025, Nov 2025, Jan 2026, Feb 2026, Mar 2026, May 2026, Jun 2026, Jul 2026, Aug 2026.
- Occupancy: 210 booked ÷ 295 available nights across 10 verified month(s): Sep 2025, Oct 2025, Nov 2025, Jan 2026, Feb 2026, Mar 2026, May 2026, Jun 2026, Jul 2026, Aug 2026.
- ADR: $47,800 accommodation revenue ÷ 210 booked nights across 10 month(s): Sep 2025, Oct 2025, Nov 2025, Jan 2026, Feb 2026, Mar 2026, May 2026, Jun 2026, Jul 2026, Aug 2026 (excludes cleaning fees and taxes).
- Go Far calculations from owner-provided records. Each figure covers only the months listed and they are not combined into an annual result.
| Month | Revenue | Booked | Available | Occupancy | ADR | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 2025 | $4,620 | 21 | 28 | 75.0% | $220 | Verified |
| Oct 2025 | $5,280 | 24 | 31 | 77.4% | $220 | Verified |
| Nov 2025 | $3,360 | 16 | 27 | 59.3% | $210 | Verified |
| Dec 2025 | — | — | — | — | — | No records |
| Jan 2026 | $2,940 | 14 | 31 | 45.2% | $210 | Verified |
| Feb 2026 | $3,150 | 15 | 28 | 53.6% | $210 | Verified |
| Mar 2026 | $4,400 | 20 | 31 | 64.5% | $220 | Verified |
| Apr 2026 | — | — | — | — | — | No records |
| May 2026 | $5,060 | 22 | 31 | 71.0% | $230 | Verified |
| Jun 2026 | $6,000 | 25 | 26 | 96.2% | $240 | Verified |
| Jul 2026 | $6,750 | 27 | 31 | 87.1% | $250 | Verified |
| Aug 2026 | $6,240 | 26 | 31 | 83.9% | $240 | Verified |
- No records for 2025-12, 2026-04 — excluded from totals, not treated as zero revenue.
Peak months (June–August) reached 88.6% combined occupancy (78 booked ÷ 88 available nights). The weakest verified month was January at 45.2%, followed by February at 53.6%. November includes 3 maintenance nights, which were removed from available nights before calculating occupancy.
4.Market and Competitor Comparison
Third-party market data: Illustrative market dataset (fictional) (Sample) — ADR $235, occupancy 64%, annual revenue $54,800.
- Comparable A (3BR, hot tub): ADR $249, occupancy 66%, revenue $59,000 — Illustrative
- Comparable B (3BR, no hot tub): ADR $205, occupancy 61%, revenue $45,600 — Illustrative
Against the illustrative market dataset, the cottage's ADR is slightly below the $235 market figure and its occupancy on verified months is above the 64% market figure — driven mostly by summer. Comparable A, which also has a hot tub, reports a higher annual ADR ($249).
5.Listing and Pricing Review
Based on owner-supplied screenshots (the live listing was not retrieved): the first photo shows the driveway rather than the lake or hot tub; the title does not mention the hot tub; and a 3-night minimum applies all year, including winter midweek.
6.Operating Expense and Cash Flow Review
Owner-reported annual expenses total $21,450 (cleaning $6,900, utilities $4,200, insurance $2,650, maintenance $2,400, platform fees $1,700, property taxes $3,600). Mortgage payments were not provided, and the expenses cover a full year while revenue records cover 10 months, so net operating income and owner cash flow are not calculated.
7.Revenue & Profit Improvement Opportunities
Each opportunity traces to information supplied by the owner or the cited market data. Effects are estimates, not guarantees.
1. Lead the listing with the hot tub and lake
High • Next 2 weeks
- What was observed
- Owner-supplied screenshots show the first photo is the driveway; the title omits the hot tub.
- Why it may affect performance
- Search results show only the first photo and the title; the property's strongest amenities are not visible there.
- Recommended action
- Reorder photos so the hot tub and lake view appear first; add 'Hot Tub' to the title.
- Estimated implementation cost
- $0 (owner time)
- Expected effect
- Not reasonably estimable from the data supplied; monitor click-through and bookings over 60 days.
- Supporting evidence
- Listing screenshots (owner-provided); amenity list (owner-reported).
2. Shorten the winter midweek minimum stay
High • Before November
- What was observed
- A 3-night minimum applies year-round; January occupancy was 45.2% and February 53.6%.
- Why it may affect performance
- Short midweek stays are common in slow months; a 3-night minimum may exclude them.
- Recommended action
- Test a 2-night minimum for Sunday–Thursday arrivals from November through March.
- Estimated implementation cost
- Additional cleaning per extra turnover (owner's current cleaning rate).
- Expected effect
- Could add bookable short stays in low months; size not estimable without inquiry data.
- Supporting evidence
- Monthly records (owner-provided); minimum-stay screenshot (owner-provided).
3. Winter pricing aligned with comparable hot-tub listings
Medium • Next 30 days
- What was observed
- Comparable A (also with a hot tub) shows a higher ADR in the illustrative dataset.
- Why it may affect performance
- The hot tub is a winter draw; current pricing does not differentiate it.
- Recommended action
- Review winter weekend rates monthly against hot-tub comparables.
- Estimated implementation cost
- $0–$20/month if a pricing tool is used.
- Expected effect
- Not reasonably estimable; depends on market response.
- Supporting evidence
- Illustrative market dataset and comparables; monthly records.
Estimated effects are not guarantees. Actual results depend on market conditions and execution.
8.Practical Action Plan
Next 2 weeks: reorder the listing photos and update the title.
Next 30 days: move to a 2-night minimum for Sunday–Thursday stays from November through March.
Before next winter: create a winter-specific pricing calendar and review it monthly against comparable listings.
9.Important Assumptions, Limitations, and Disclosures
This is an illustrative example. The property, records, market figures and comparables are fictional and do not describe any real client or real results.
This operator-reviewed report is based on owner-provided information and the market data cited. Go Far did not access your platform accounts. It is not a guarantee of revenue, occupancy, bookings or profitability, and is not legal, tax or financial advice.