This article critically engages with the authors’ proposal for home stewardship as an alternative to individual homeownership under financialised rentier capitalism. Their framing of housing as a key asset within rentier capitalism builds on well-established debates and underscores the persistent class dynamics structured through housing. However, the proposed model raises complex conceptual questions concerning ownership, class relations, and the role of the state. Drawing on debates around asset-based class structures, I interrogate the extent to which this proposal genuinely extends existing frameworks or instead repackages them in more progressive terms. I identify three areas that require deeper theorisation: housing in capital circulation, housing as commons, and the role of the state. I argue that stronger engagement with relational class analysis, commons theory, and state theory can enrich the conceptual foundations of home stewardship. This contribution aims to stimulate further debate on how to disentangle housing from speculative logics and reimagine it as a collective, democratic, and non-financialised form of provision.