Aintree vs Mountain Bay
Property investment comparison - Aintree, VIC 3336 vs Mountain Bay, VIC 3723
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Aintree wins 2, Mountain Bay 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 | Aintree | Mountain Bay |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $705K | - |
| Median unit price | $575K | $675K |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 3.98% | 3.74% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | 2.49% | 6.34% |
| 1-year house growth | +1.1% | - |
| 3-year house growth | -3.9% | - |
| Vacancy rate | 14.5% | 13.5% |
| Population | 7,982 | 54 |
Aintree vs Mountain Bay: what the numbers say
For units, Aintree sits at a median of $575K against $675K in Mountain Bay, which makes Aintree the more affordable unit market and Mountain Bay the pricier one.
On cash flow, Aintree leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 3.98%, compared with 3.74% in Mountain Bay, a gap of 0.24 percentage points.
Rental vacancy is 13.5% in Mountain Bay and 14.5% in Aintree, so landlords in Mountain Bay face less competition for tenants.
Aintree is the bigger suburb, with a population of 7,982 against 54, roughly 148 times the size of Mountain Bay; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Aintree for rental income, Mountain Bay 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