Bali, Thailand or Portugal for property?

These get compared as if they are the same decision. They are not. The difference is not price or yield. It is what you actually end up holding.

The structural difference

Portugal. A foreigner can own freehold outright. Your name, permanent, inheritable. [Verify the current residency and visa position separately, it has changed recently]

Thailand. A foreigner can own a condominium unit, subject to building quotas, but cannot own the land under a house. Leases are typically limited. Structurally closer to Indonesia than most people assume.

Bali. No outright ownership in any form. Leasehold, a registered right to use, or a company-held right. Every option runs on a clock.

If certainty of ownership is what you are buying, the answer is not Bali. That is not a criticism, it is just what the law says.

What Bali has that the others do not

Demand density. Nearly 7 million foreign arrivals in 2025, up almost 10%, on an island you can drive across in a few hours. Nightly rates that support genuine hospitality yields.

Portugal gives you security and modest returns. Bali gives you returns and a clock. Thailand sits between them.

The comparison people should actually run

Not gross yield against gross yield. Run net return after every cost, and after amortising a time-limited right over the years remaining.

Compare that against a freehold market where nothing amortises. It is the only comparison that means anything, and it usually narrows the gap considerably.

The calculator does that if you set the residual value to zero.

How to choose

Ask what the money is for.

Preserving capital and passing it on? A market where you own the asset outright.

Producing income over a defined period you are comfortable with? Bali is competitive and the demand is not in question.

Both? They are rarely the same asset, and anyone telling you otherwise is selling one of them.