Almurta vs Scoresby
Property investment comparison - Almurta, VIC 3979 vs Scoresby, VIC 3179
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Almurta wins 2, Scoresby 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.
| Metric | Almurta | Scoresby |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $1.0M | $1.0M |
| Median unit price | $190K | $720K |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 2.04% | 3.32% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | 9.53% | 4.40% |
| 1-year house growth | - | +0.6%estimate |
| 3-year house growth | - | - |
| Vacancy rate | - | 2.4% |
| Population | 66 | 6,066 |
Almurta vs Scoresby: what the numbers say
Houses cost about the same in both suburbs: the median house price is $1.0M in Almurta and $1.0M in Scoresby.
For units, Almurta sits at a median of $190K against $720K in Scoresby, which makes Almurta the more affordable unit market and Scoresby the pricier one.
On cash flow, Scoresby leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 3.32%, compared with 2.04% in Almurta, a gap of 1.28 percentage points.
Scoresby is the bigger suburb, with a population of 6,066 against 66, roughly 92 times the size of Almurta; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Scoresby for rental income. 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