More rental housing operators than ever are seeing pet ownership rise among their tenants. A recent survey by PetScreening reports that 81% of rental housing operators have seen growth in pet ownership, and 68% now describe themselves as pet-friendly. For Canadian landlords weighing whether to allow pets, the numbers suggest that a blanket “no pets” policy might be leaving money on the table. The same survey found that only 43% of renters report owning a pet, even though 71% of U.S. households own one — a gap that hints at widespread underreporting. What matters for landlords is what happens when those pets are officially welcomed.
Disclosure: Some links on this page are affiliate links. If you make a purchase through them, Britwealth may earn a commission at no extra cost to you. We only include products and services that are relevant to the topic.
This article is general information only and does not constitute professional advice. For your specific situation, consult a qualified professional.
The shift is not just about being nice to animal lovers. A growing body of research — including a landmark study by Frank, Frank, and Nielsen — shows that renting to pet owners can actually improve a landlord’s bottom line. Tenants with pets tend to stay longer, vacancy rates drop, and the extra rent charged for pets more than covers any damage. Canadian landlords who still default to “no pets” may want to look again at what the data actually says. The trend toward pet-friendly housing is accelerating, and the evidence suggests it pays. Here’s what you actually need to know.
What the Research Actually Shows About Pet-Friendly Rentals
The term pet-friendly housing gets thrown around a lot, but it means different things to different landlords. Some allow cats only. Others cap weight at 25 pounds. A truly pet-friendly policy welcomes pets with clear rules — limits on number, breed, and weight — and often charges additional rent or a pet deposit to cover extra risk. What I tend to notice is that many landlords assume pet damage will eat into their profits, but the research tells a story that’s harder to ignore. The Frank, Frank, and Nielsen study found that the financial gains from pet-friendly policies consistently outweighed the costs. That finding has held up in subsequent research, including a 2024 evidence review published in the International Journal of Housing Policy that examined 51 sources and concluded that pet-friendly rentals benefit both landlords and tenants.
The Real Cost Difference Between Pet-Friendly and Pet-Restricted Rentals
Most landlords focus on the risk of scratched floors and chewed baseboards. That risk is real — 85% of landlords who allow pets report some damage — but the numbers show it’s usually minor. The Frank, Frank, and Nielsen study found that damage from pets averaged less than one month’s rent or the standard security deposit. Compare that to the cost of a unit sitting empty for two weeks between tenants, and the math starts to shift.
The table below lays out what the research shows when you compare pet-friendly and pet-restricted properties across the metrics that actually affect your return.
→ Scroll right to see all columns
| Metric | Pet-Friendly Properties | Pet-Restricted Properties |
|---|---|---|
| Rent premium | Slight premium possible (pet rent + higher base rent) | Standard market rate only |
| Vacancy rates | Significantly lower | Higher, with more frequent turnover gaps |
| Tenant turnover | Lower — tenants stay years longer on average | Higher — more move-outs and re-letting costs |
| Damage costs | Typically under one month’s rent | Varies, but no pet-specific upcharge to offset |
| Overall revenue | Higher — gains from rent, retention, and fewer vacancies | Lower — no pet premium, more turnover |
For Canadian landlords, the implication is straightforward. If you charge an extra £25–£50 per month in pet rent and avoid even one extra vacancy per year, the numbers tip in your favour. What I’d do is run the numbers on your own property: what does a two-week vacancy cost you in lost rent? Compare that to the worst-case pet damage scenario, and the answer is usually clearer than you’d expect. The broader context is that corporate landlords are already shifting toward pet-friendly models, and individual owners may want to pay attention to where the market is heading.
Common Misconceptions Canadian Landlords Have About Pet-Friendly Rentals
The research identifies several gaps between what landlords assume and what the data actually shows. These are the four that come up most often.
Pets Will Destroy the Property
This is the biggest fear, and it’s not baseless — 85% of pet-friendly landlords report some form of pet damage. But the same research shows that damage almost never exceeds one month’s rent or the security deposit. A scratched door or a stained carpet is annoying, but it’s not a financial catastrophe. What landlords often overlook is that non-pet tenants also cause damage, and there’s no extra fee to cover it. A pet deposit or pet rent gives you a dedicated cushion that non-pet units don’t have.
Pet Owners Are Less Reliable Tenants
The data shows the opposite. Tenants with pets stay longer — often years longer — than those in pet-restricted housing. That means fewer move-outs, lower turnover costs, and less time spent advertising and showing the unit. A 2024 evidence review in the International Journal of Housing Policy confirmed that longer tenancy duration is one of the most consistent financial benefits of pet-friendly policies. A tenant who stays three years instead of one saves you a full cycle of re-letting fees and vacancy loss.
It’s Not Worth the Extra Work
Managing pet-friendly rentals does require a bit more paperwork — pet policies, screening, and tracking. But the PetScreening data shows that properties using a structured pet management system saw a 30.7% increase in revenue. The administrative lift is small compared to the return. PetScreening’s platform alone saved operators an estimated 1.3 million hours in administrative and legal work related to assistance-animal requests. The lesson is clear: the extra effort pays for itself.
Weight and Breed Restrictions Solve Everything
Nearly 60% of operators use weight limits and 67% use breed restrictions. These can help manage risk, but they also shrink your tenant pool and don’t guarantee problem-free tenancies. A small dog can cause more damage than a well-trained large one. What matters more is screening the pet and the owner together — checking for vaccination records, spay/neuter status, and previous landlord references. Blanket restrictions can also run into human rights issues with assistance animals, which are not pets under the law.
How to Build a Profitable Pet-Friendly Rental Strategy
Moving from “no pets” to “yes, with conditions” doesn’t have to be complicated. Here’s what the process looks like in practice, based on what the research and industry data support.
Set Clear Written Policies on Number, Breed, and Weight
Before you advertise a unit as pet-friendly, put your rules in writing. Be specific about how many pets are allowed per unit (78.4% of operators limit this), which breeds you exclude (66.7% do), and the maximum weight (59.8% set a cap). A clear policy avoids arguments later and makes enforcement straightforward. You can find model pet agreements through programs like Better Cities for Pets, which offers free guidelines and sample contracts.
Charge a Pet Deposit or Monthly Pet Rent
The research supports charging extra. A one-time pet deposit or a monthly pet rent gives you a dedicated fund for any pet-related damage. Canadian rules on pet deposits vary by province — check your local tenancy laws to see what’s allowed. What I’d do is pair the deposit with a signed pet agreement that spells out the tenant’s responsibilities, including carpet cleaning and flea control at move-out.
Screen the Pet Alongside the Tenant
Pet screening is now a standard practice in the industry. You ask for the pet’s age, breed, weight, vaccination records, spay/neuter status, and a reference from a previous landlord. Platforms like PetScreening handle this at no cost to property owners. Screening reduces the chance of unauthorised pets — the survey found a gap between overall pet ownership (71%) and renters reporting pets (43%), suggesting many pets are already in units unofficially. Formal screening brings those pets into the open and lets you collect the revenue you’re entitled to.
Consider Low-Cost Amenities That Attract Pet Owners
You don’t need a full dog park. The PetScreening survey found the most common pet amenities are pet waste stations (45%) and pet parks (35%). A simple waste bag dispenser and a designated pet area cost very little but signal that your property is genuinely pet-friendly. For Canadian landlords, especially those managing single-family rentals or small multi-unit buildings, even a small outdoor space with a waste bin can make a difference. If you’re managing a unit remotely, a smart lock with keypad access can help tenants enter without you needing to hand over physical keys — useful for pet owners who may need to coordinate dog walkers or pet sitters. And if you have legal questions about landlord-tenant rules for pets in your province, having access to quick legal guidance can save you from costly mistakes.
Frequently Asked Questions About Pet-Friendly Rentals
Can I charge a pet deposit in Canada? ▾
What happens if a tenant hides a pet from me? ▾
Are emotional support animals considered pets under the law? ▾
How much extra should I charge for a pet? ▾
Will allowing pets affect my insurance? ▾
Do pet-friendly units take longer to rent? ▾
Why the Pet-Friendly Shift Is Unlikely to Reverse
The data on pet-friendly rentals has been building for nearly two decades. The Frank, Frank, and Nielsen study from 2005 showed the financial case. The 2024 evidence review in the International Journal of Housing Policy confirmed it across 51 international sources. The PetScreening survey of 673 property managers shows the industry is already moving: 68% of operators are pet-friendly, and that number is growing. For Canadian landlords, the question is no longer whether pets are worth the risk. It’s whether the default “no pets” stance is costing you more than you realise. The research says it is.
Remember: this article is general information only. For advice on your specific situation, speak to a qualified professional.
If this was useful, you might also want to read Why More Canadians Are Choosing Tiny Homes and Alternative Housing Options.
Sources and Further Reading
Condo vs House: Untangling the Canadian Homeownership Debate — A practical comparison of housing types, useful for landlords deciding what kind of property to offer for pet-friendly rentals.
How Corporate Landlords Are Changing the Real Estate Landscape in Canada — Context on the rental market trends that are pushing more properties toward pet-friendly policies.
Carlisle-Frank, P., Frank, J. M., & Nielsen, L. (2005). Companion Animal Renters and Pet-Friendly Housing in the US. Anthrozoös, 18(1), 59–77. 🔗
PetScreening. (2026). 2026 State of Pets in Rental Housing Report. 🔗
Psychology Today. (2024). The Landlord’s Dilemma: Renting to People With Pets. 🔗
Taylor & Francis. (2024). Pet Ownership in the Private Rented Sector: A Rapid Evidence Assessment. International Journal of Housing Policy. 🔗
