Skip to main content

Aintree vs Pakenham Upper

Property investment comparison - Aintree, VIC 3336 vs Pakenham Upper, VIC 3810

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Aintree wins 3, Pakenham Upper 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.

MetricAintreePakenham Upper
Median house price$705K-
Median unit price$575K$1.3M
Gross rental yield (houses)3.98%1.97%
Gross rental yield (units)2.49%2.11%
1-year house growth+1.1%-
3-year house growth-3.9%-
Vacancy rate14.5%6.7%
Population7,9821,196

Aintree vs Pakenham Upper: what the numbers say

For units, Aintree sits at a median of $575K against $1.3M in Pakenham Upper, which makes Aintree the more affordable unit market and Pakenham Upper the pricier one.

On cash flow, Aintree leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 3.98%, compared with 1.97% in Pakenham Upper, a gap of 2.01 percentage points.

Rental vacancy is 6.7% in Pakenham Upper and 14.5% in Aintree, so landlords in Pakenham Upper face less competition for tenants.

Aintree is the bigger suburb, with a population of 7,982 against 1,196, roughly 7 times the size of Pakenham Upper; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Aintree for rental income, Pakenham Upper 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