Aberfeldie vs Muckleford
Property investment comparison - Aberfeldie, VIC 3040 vs Muckleford, VIC 3451
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Aberfeldie wins 2, Muckleford wins 1. 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 | Muckleford |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $1.8M | - |
| Median unit price | $685K | $765K |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 1.98% | 3.04% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | - | 2.76% |
| 1-year house growth | -0.7%estimate | - |
| 3-year house growth | - | - |
| Vacancy rate | 1.5% | 3.2% |
| Population | 3,925 | 426 |
Aberfeldie vs Muckleford: what the numbers say
For units, Aberfeldie sits at a median of $685K against $765K in Muckleford, which makes Aberfeldie the more affordable unit market and Muckleford the pricier one.
On cash flow, Muckleford leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 3.04%, compared with 1.98% in Aberfeldie, a gap of 1.06 percentage points.
Rental vacancy is 1.5% in Aberfeldie and 3.2% in Muckleford, 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 426, roughly 9 times the size of Muckleford; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Muckleford 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