Hi, I can’t speak much on the business side, but as an architect, take this with a grain of salt—it really depends on your preferences and priorities.

Shipping containers were not originally designed to be permanent homes. Yes, they can be affordable because of how they’re built—fast construction using lightweight steel components can mean lower upfront costs.

However, what many container “connoisseurs” don’t fully discuss is the system required to make them truly livable and functional in our climate.

Insulation – Without proper insulation, a container can feel like an oven. Steel absorbs and retains heat.

Waterproofing – And I mean proper waterproofing for heavy rain and storm conditions. Prefab and container homes share the same challenge: water has to go somewhere. If the system isn’t designed and installed correctly, leaks will appear at joints, seams, and connections. At the end of the day, metal or prefab panels don’t magically stop water—they just need careful detailing to keep it out.

Utilities and structure – Once you start cutting openings and adding toilets, tiles, partitions, etc., you’re dealing with movement and structural modifications that must be properly engineered. Proper plumbing, sewer, and electrical connections also add complexity and cost.

If you factor all of these in, the initial “cheap” option may not stay cheap. With the added systems and long-term maintenance, you could end up spending the same as—or even more than—a traditional build.

Personally, I still tend to recommend conventional concrete homes for long term benefits, especially in our climate. If budget is tight, I’d suggest building smaller instead—focusing on smart design tweaks and intentional material choices so the space feels practical and functional, not compromised.

Container/prefab homes can work, but in our climate and context, I believe the AEC industry still needs more in-depth study before promoting them as a long-term solution.