Aberfeldie vs Maude
Property investment comparison - Aberfeldie, VIC 3040 vs Maude, VIC 3331
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Aberfeldie wins 0, Maude 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 | Maude |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $1.8M | - |
| Median unit price | $685K | - |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 1.98% | 3.20% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | - | - |
| 1-year house growth | -0.7%estimate | - |
| 3-year house growth | - | - |
| Vacancy rate | 1.5% | 1.0% |
| Population | 3,925 | 211 |
Aberfeldie vs Maude: what the numbers say
On cash flow, Maude leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 3.20%, compared with 1.98% in Aberfeldie, a gap of 1.22 percentage points.
Rental vacancy is 1.0% in Maude and 1.5% in Aberfeldie, so landlords in Maude 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 211, roughly 19 times the size of Maude; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Maude for rental income, Maude 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