Skip to main content

Aintree vs Lake Bunga

Property investment comparison - Aintree, VIC 3336 vs Lake Bunga, VIC 3909

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Aintree wins 2, Lake Bunga wins 4. 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.

MetricAintreeLake Bunga
Median house price$705K-
Median unit price$575K$395K
Gross rental yield (houses)3.98%4.25%
Gross rental yield (units)2.49%5.00%
1-year house growth+1.1%-1.0%
3-year house growth-3.9%-4.0%
Vacancy rate14.5%2.2%
Population7,982408

Aintree vs Lake Bunga: what the numbers say

For units, Aintree sits at a median of $575K against $395K in Lake Bunga, which makes Lake Bunga the more affordable unit market and Aintree the pricier one.

On cash flow, Lake Bunga leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 4.25%, compared with 3.98% in Aintree, a gap of 0.27 percentage points.

Over the past year house prices moved +1.1% in Aintree and -1.0% in Lake Bunga, so recent momentum favours Aintree, while Lake Bunga went backwards.

Looking back three years, Aintree houses are -3.9% and Lake Bunga houses -4.0%, so Aintree has compounded faster than Lake Bunga over the longer window.

Rental vacancy is 2.2% in Lake Bunga and 14.5% in Aintree, so landlords in Lake Bunga face less competition for tenants.

Aintree is the bigger suburb, with a population of 7,982 against 408, roughly 20 times the size of Lake Bunga; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Lake Bunga for rental income, Aintree for recent price momentum, Lake Bunga for the tighter rental market. Which matters more depends on whether the investor is buying for cash flow, capital growth or affordability.

Keep exploring

Compare any 2-4 Australian suburbs

Build your own multi-suburb comparison with the full interactive tool.

Open interactive comparison