Alkimos vs Greenfields
Property investment comparison - Alkimos, WA 6038 vs Greenfields, WA 6210
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Alkimos wins 1, Greenfields 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 | Alkimos | Greenfields |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $850K | - |
| Median unit price | - | - |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 4.30% | 4.50% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | 5.18% | 5.20% |
| 1-year house growth | +18.2% | +17.3%estimate |
| 3-year house growth | +72.9% | - |
| Vacancy rate | 2.0% | 1.8% |
| Population | 10,203 | 9,869 |
Alkimos vs Greenfields: what the numbers say
On cash flow, Greenfields leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 4.50%, compared with 4.30% in Alkimos, a gap of 0.20 percentage points.
Over the past year house prices moved +18.2% in Alkimos and +17.3% in Greenfields (an estimate), so recent momentum favours Alkimos, although both suburbs recorded growth.
Rental vacancy is 1.8% in Greenfields and 2.0% in Alkimos, so landlords in Greenfields face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.
Alkimos is the bigger suburb, with a population of 10,203 against 9,869, larger than Greenfields; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Greenfields for rental income, Alkimos for recent price momentum, Greenfields 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