Acton vs Quoiba
Property investment comparison - Acton, TAS 7320 vs Quoiba, TAS 7310
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Acton wins 2, Quoiba 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 | Acton | Quoiba |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $480K | - |
| Median unit price | $490K | $480K |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 4.90% | 4.68% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | 3.99% | 5.37% |
| 1-year house growth | +21.6% | - |
| 3-year house growth | +30.3% | - |
| Vacancy rate | 2.0% | 2.2% |
| Population | 1,377 | 427 |
Acton vs Quoiba: what the numbers say
For units, Acton sits at a median of $490K against $480K in Quoiba, which makes Quoiba the more affordable unit market and Acton the pricier one.
On cash flow, Acton leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 4.90%, compared with 4.68% in Quoiba, a gap of 0.22 percentage points.
Rental vacancy is 2.0% in Acton and 2.2% in Quoiba, so landlords in Acton face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.
Acton is the bigger suburb, with a population of 1,377 against 427, roughly 3.2 times the size of Quoiba; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Acton for rental income, Acton 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