The math on home security is murkier than the commercials suggest
Home security systems are sold as a straightforward trade: you pay a monthly fee, and your home becomes dramatically safer. The reality is more complicated. What you're actually buying is a layered combination of deterrence, detection, and response — and each of those three things has a different level of evidence behind it. Deterrence (making your home look like a harder target) is genuinely well-supported by research. Detection (being alerted when something is happening) has improved enormously with modern technology. Response — the part where professional monitoring actually dispatches help — is where the value equation gets genuinely fuzzy, and where most people overpay.
The monthly fee in a professionally monitored contract primarily pays for a 24/7 call center that contacts you, then emergency services, when your alarm triggers. But average police response times to residential alarm calls in the U.S. run between 5 and 11 minutes in urban areas — and significantly longer in suburban and rural ones. Meanwhile, the FBI reports that the average home burglary takes less than 10 minutes. That doesn't mean monitoring is worthless, but it does mean the "someone will come save your home" framing overstates how the system actually works in practice.
The stronger case for a security system isn't response time — it's that most burglars actively avoid alarmed homes in the first place. A widely cited University of North Carolina study surveying 422 convicted burglars found that the majority said an alarm would cause them to abandon or avoid a target entirely. Visible cameras, yard signs, and door/window sensors create a deterrent effect that is real and measurable. Whether that deterrent is worth $40 a month — or whether you can achieve most of the same effect for far less — is the actual question worth asking.
The "is it worth it" question looks different depending on your situation
People land on this question from very different starting points — and the honest answer varies depending on where you are, what you already have, and what you're actually trying to protect against.
Getting this wrong costs you money for years — or leaves a real gap in your protection
The stakes here run in both directions. If you dismiss home security entirely, you may be underestimating a genuine, evidence-backed deterrent — especially if you live in an area with elevated property crime rates or if you're frequently away from home. A burglary costs the average U.S. household roughly $2,800 in losses and damages, not counting the psychological toll of feeling violated in your own space. On the other side, millions of households are overpaying for monitoring contracts that provide limited marginal benefit over what a well-configured self-monitored system could deliver at a fraction of the cost. Long-term contracts with annual auto-renewals and early-termination fees can lock you into paying for a service that no longer fits your life or your needs. The cost of inertia — just keeping paying because cancelling is a hassle — is real and adds up quickly.
A professionally monitored contract averaging $45/month costs $540 per year and $2,700 over a typical five-year contract term. The FBI's 2023 crime data puts the average loss per residential burglary at approximately $2,800 — meaning a single prevented burglary could theoretically justify several years of fees. But your personal risk level, neighborhood crime rate, and what self-monitoring alternatives now offer should all factor into that math before you sign anything.
There is a trusted solution for this.
We've worked through the evidence on deterrence, monitoring value, self-monitored alternatives, insurance discounts, and contract traps — so you can make a clear-eyed decision rather than a fear-driven one.
See the Trusted Solution →Free to read · Independently verified · Updated March 2026
What others have experienced
47 community experiences-
MR
We had ADT for six years, never used it once, and were paying $58/month by the time I finally did the math. Switched to a self-monitored Ring setup with a couple of cameras and door sensors for a one-time cost of about $280. Honestly feel just as secure — maybe more so because I actually check the app. The yard sign is still up and I genuinely think that's doing most of the work anyway.
31 found this helpful -
TP
Our house was actually broken into two years ago while we had a monitored system. The alarm went off, the monitoring company called us, called 911 — and the police showed up 18 minutes later. The burglar was long gone with our laptops and jewelry. I don't regret having the system because it probably deterred worse, but I want people to know that "monitored" doesn't mean someone is rushing to your house in minutes. We stayed with the service but we added a dog, which our neighbor says is a bigger deterrent than any alarm.
58 found this helpful -
DK
I rent and was skeptical about any security system since I can't put holes in walls. Ended up with a SimpliSafe setup that required zero installation damage — wireless everything, battery-backed sensors on windows and doors, and a base station that just sits on a shelf. Pays for itself partly through my renter's insurance discount (my insurer knocked 12% off my premium). The whole thing cost me about $22/month for monitoring and I can take it with me when I move. Not for everyone but it solved my specific situation pretty cleanly.
24 found this helpful
Have you dealt with this? Share what you tried — it helps others in the same situation.