I agree that the mechanisms are somewhat similar, but also that they are wildly different (unlike a securities margin loan or pledged asset line, your lender can't foreclose if the value of the property declines and you can't meet a margin call; as long as you keep paying the note, the value of the property could plummet to zero and the lender must continue to accept payments and allow you to retain ownership of the parcel).

Conversely, someone like Interactive Brokers is going to liquidate your holdings with extreme prejudice if the securities collateral declines below what their risk management feels comfortable with (other brokers are going to call you and perform a margin call).

You also can get way more leverage with real estate loans versus margin loans or pledged asset lines.

It's good that they can't, but even in the stock market you can get perpetual gradual margin calls that you can continue to meet if you felt like it, as long as they were gradual and not steep then a good broker will not liquidate your position at the lows.

I'm mainly responding to provide helpful context to others. Not for a typical pedantic thread where we are already agreeing with each other but just squabbling over semantics.

I would say this is the primary savings grace for real estate investors and homeowners. They get to build equity in so many scenarios that it works out for them and lets them maintain access to low cost capital, against the equity they build up.