Aberfeldie vs Cooma
Property investment comparison - Aberfeldie, VIC 3040 vs Cooma, VIC 3616
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Aberfeldie wins 1, Cooma wins 2. The better choice depends on whether you're optimising for cash flow, growth, affordability, or liquidity, the table below highlights the winner on each metric.
| Metric | Aberfeldie | Cooma |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $1.8M | - |
| Median unit price | $685K | $240K |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 1.98% | 2.80% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | - | - |
| 1-year house growth | -0.7%estimate | - |
| 3-year house growth | - | - |
| Vacancy rate | 1.5% | 2.7% |
| Population | 3,925 | 94 |
Aberfeldie vs Cooma: what the numbers say
For units, Aberfeldie sits at a median of $685K against $240K in Cooma, which makes Cooma the more affordable unit market and Aberfeldie the pricier one.
On cash flow, Cooma leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 2.80%, compared with 1.98% in Aberfeldie, a gap of 0.82 percentage points.
Rental vacancy is 1.5% in Aberfeldie and 2.7% in Cooma, so landlords in Aberfeldie face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.
Aberfeldie is the bigger suburb, with a population of 3,925 against 94, roughly 42 times the size of Cooma; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Cooma for rental income, Aberfeldie for the tighter rental market. Which matters more depends on whether the investor is buying for cash flow, capital growth or affordability.
Keep exploring
- National investment guide - top suburbs across every metric
- Take the suburb finder quiz - 5 questions to match your goals
- How our investment score works
- Property investment glossary - every term defined
Compare any 2-4 Australian suburbs
Build your own multi-suburb comparison with the full interactive tool.
Open interactive comparison