Every owner who has ever considered handing us a flat asks one version of the same question: would this actually work for my property? Market averages do not answer it. Postcode league tables do not answer it. What answers it — imperfectly, but honestly — is the track record of one real flat, with every source named and every limitation stated. So that is what this post publishes: fourteen months of hosting our Canary Wharf flagship, with an eleven-month audited data window, the two-bed unit behind every performance claim on this site. Each number below sits on our public claims ledger, carries its source, and carries the caveat that keeps it honest. Where we cannot prove something, we say so — including one claim we retired.
The flat, and the window we're measuring
The property is a two-bed in Canary Wharf, E14, with the Jubilee and Elizabeth lines within walking distance — no minute-count claim, because walking times vary and we only publish what TfL's Journey Planner supports. We began hosting it in May 2025. As of July 2026 that is fourteen months, and we want to be precise about what that figure is: calendar arithmetic, not a performance claim. It is computed at render from the launch date rather than hardcoded, so it will read fifteen next month without anyone having to remember to update it. Tenure tells you how long the calendar has been open; the sections below tell you what actually happened inside it.
Occupancy: why the tilde in ~87% is deliberate
The flat has run at ~87% occupancy since launch. The source is the Airbnb calendar export covering 2025-05→2026-04 — eleven operating months — and the export is supplied on request to any owner who asks. Note the mismatch on purpose: hosting tenure is fourteen months, but the audited export window is eleven. We quote occupancy only against the period we can hand you the file for, which is why the figure carries a tilde rather than a decimal point.
There is a history here worth owning. Until 20 April 2026 the site carried a stronger occupancy claim for this flat. We retired it, because we could not produce a continuous calendar export proving there had been no un-booked night across the whole period — and a claim we cannot evidence is a claim we do not make, however flattering it is. It was softened to ~87% occupancy since launch, and the retirement, the reason, and the rule for reinstating a stronger figure are all published on the claims ledger. If the number ever changes on this page, the ledger entry changes first.
Reviews: 176, counted the boring way
Across all properties we stand at 176 verified reviews: 170 on Airbnb at 4.74★ plus 6 on Booking.com at 10/10. The flagship itself had 29 five-star reviews at its April-2026 launch, and holds Superhost status. The source for all of this is the private Airbnb host dashboard — operational data, no public URL — which is exactly why we publish the split rather than a rounded vanity number. A scope-explicit count is auditable; "hundreds of happy guests" is not. The count is re-verified on a rolling basis, and if any entry is challenged we retract or cite within 48 hours via compliance@bigbensuite.co.uk.
| Metric | Figure | Source | Limitation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Months hosting | 14 (May 2025 → July 2026) | Launch date; computed at render | Calendar arithmetic, not a performance claim |
| Occupancy | ~87% since launch | Airbnb calendar export 2025-05→2026-04 (eleven operating months), supplied on request | Tilde is deliberate; single unit |
| Reviews | 176 verified: 170 Airbnb at 4.74★ + 6 Booking.com at 10/10 | Private Airbnb host dashboard — operational data, no public URL | 29 at the flagship at April-2026 launch; re-verified rolling |
| Gross revenue | ~£4,800/mo | Published nightly rate × 87% occupancy | Single unit, case-study surface only, not a portfolio average |
| AST comparator | £2,600/mo | Local-comp figure from the flagship acquisition pack | Case-study surface only |
| Compliance | EPC B; Gas Safety valid to 2027; EICR valid to 2027 | Per-unit compliance file, supplied on request | One property's file, not a portfolio statement |
Revenue: ~£4,800 against £2,600 — one unit, not a portfolio
The flat grosses ~£4,800 per month against a £2,600 traditional AST comparator. Both halves of that sentence have workings. The £4,800 is the published nightly rate multiplied by the 87% occupancy figure above — no hidden uplift, no best-month cherry-pick. The £2,600 is the local-comp figure from the flagship acquisition pack: what the same flat was benchmarked to earn on a standard tenancy when we underwrote it. And both halves carry the same limitation, which we will keep repeating because it is the one that matters: this is a single unit, case-study surface only, not a portfolio average.
What this comparison cannot tell you is what your flat would do. Your nightly rate depends on your postcode, bedroom count, condition and season; your AST benchmark depends on your local market, not ours. The honest use of this post is as an existence proof — one real flat, running this model, with receipts — and the honest next step is to run your own numbers through the estimator rather than transplanting ours.
"If a figure can't survive its own source being published alongside it, it doesn't go on the site. Named source, dated verification, retraction route — or nothing."
Compliance: the unglamorous line items
Performance numbers get the attention, but the file that makes them lettable is duller and more important. The flagship holds an EPC rating of B, a Gas Safety certificate valid to 2027, and an EICR valid to 2027 — all held in a per-unit compliance file, supplied on request. We publish this for the same reason we publish the calendar export: an owner deciding whether to trust us with a flat should be able to see how we keep our own in order before asking us to keep theirs.
What we can't prove yet
A portfolio-level performance average, for one — we have one flagship's audited export, so we publish one flagship's numbers and resist the temptation to dress them up as a fleet statistic. Future performance, for another: fourteen months tells you the model has run through a full seasonal cycle and then some, not that the next twelve will match it. Where the honest answer is "we don't have the evidence yet", that is the answer you will get.
How to test this against your own flat
The estimator applies zone-mapped nightly-rate and occupancy benchmarks — built from AirDNA, ONS and Rightmove data and re-verified quarterly — to your postcode and bedroom count, and returns a monthly gross estimate alongside an AST benchmark. It carries the same limitations as the £4,800-versus-£2,600 comparison above — indicative, single-figure, caveated — but is built from zone benchmarks, not our flagship's actual listing.
