Albion vs Red Cliffs
Property investment comparison - Albion, VIC 3020 vs Red Cliffs, VIC 3496
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Albion wins 1, Red Cliffs wins 3. 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 | Albion | Red Cliffs |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $800K | - |
| Median unit price | - | - |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 3.44% | 5.22% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | 5.97% | 6.36% |
| 1-year house growth | +4.7%estimate | +10.1% |
| 3-year house growth | - | +32.5% |
| Vacancy rate | 1.5% | 1.7% |
| Population | 4,334 | 5,294 |
Albion vs Red Cliffs: what the numbers say
On cash flow, Red Cliffs leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 5.22%, compared with 3.44% in Albion, a gap of 1.78 percentage points.
Over the past year house prices moved +4.7% in Albion (an estimate) and +10.1% in Red Cliffs, so recent momentum favours Red Cliffs, although both suburbs recorded growth.
Rental vacancy is 1.5% in Albion and 1.7% in Red Cliffs, so landlords in Albion face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.
Red Cliffs is the bigger suburb, with a population of 5,294 against 4,334, larger than Albion; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Red Cliffs for rental income, Red Cliffs for recent price momentum, Albion 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