Alexandra vs Muckleford
Property investment comparison - Alexandra, VIC 3714 vs Muckleford, VIC 3451
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Alexandra wins 3, Muckleford wins 0. 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 | Alexandra | Muckleford |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $535K | - |
| Median unit price | - | $765K |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 4.19% | 3.04% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | 4.60% | 2.76% |
| 1-year house growth | +7.9% | - |
| 3-year house growth | +7.9% | - |
| Vacancy rate | 0.9% | 3.2% |
| Population | 2,801 | 426 |
Alexandra vs Muckleford: what the numbers say
On cash flow, Alexandra leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 4.19%, compared with 3.04% in Muckleford, a gap of 1.15 percentage points.
Rental vacancy is 0.9% in Alexandra and 3.2% in Muckleford, so landlords in Alexandra face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.
Alexandra is the bigger suburb, with a population of 2,801 against 426, roughly 7 times the size of Muckleford; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Alexandra for rental income, Alexandra 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