Skip to main content

Alfred Cove vs Kalamunda

Property investment comparison - Alfred Cove, WA 6154 vs Kalamunda, WA 6076

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Alfred Cove wins 2, Kalamunda 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.

MetricAlfred CoveKalamunda
Median house price$1.6M-
Median unit price$740K$785K
Gross rental yield (houses)3.10%-
Gross rental yield (units)5.26%4.07%
1-year house growth+11.9%+18.9%
3-year house growth+59.5%+64.1%
Vacancy rate1.1%0.3%
Population2,8307,163

Alfred Cove vs Kalamunda: what the numbers say

For units, Alfred Cove sits at a median of $740K against $785K in Kalamunda, which makes Alfred Cove the more affordable unit market and Kalamunda the pricier one.

Over the past year house prices moved +11.9% in Alfred Cove and +18.9% in Kalamunda, so recent momentum favours Kalamunda, although both suburbs recorded growth.

Looking back three years, Alfred Cove houses are +59.5% and Kalamunda houses +64.1%, so Kalamunda has compounded faster than Alfred Cove over the longer window.

Rental vacancy is 0.3% in Kalamunda and 1.1% in Alfred Cove, so landlords in Kalamunda face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.

Kalamunda is the bigger suburb, with a population of 7,163 against 2,830, roughly 2.5 times the size of Alfred Cove; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Kalamunda for recent price momentum, Kalamunda 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