Anderson vs Woodend
Property investment comparison - Anderson, VIC 3995 vs Woodend, VIC 3442
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Anderson wins 0, Woodend 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 | Anderson | Woodend |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $1.1M | $1.1M |
| Median unit price | - | $710K |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 2.32% | 3.26% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | - | 4.19% |
| 1-year house growth | - | +9.3% |
| 3-year house growth | - | +0.5% |
| Vacancy rate | 6.2% | 0.3% |
| Population | 26 | 6,732 |
Anderson vs Woodend: what the numbers say
The median house price is $1.1M in Anderson and $1.1M in Woodend, so Woodend is the cheaper entry point, with Anderson houses about 1% dearer.
On cash flow, Woodend leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 3.26%, compared with 2.32% in Anderson, a gap of 0.94 percentage points.
Rental vacancy is 0.3% in Woodend and 6.2% in Anderson, so landlords in Woodend face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.
Woodend is the bigger suburb, with a population of 6,732 against 26, roughly 259 times the size of Anderson; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Woodend for rental income, Woodend for a lower purchase price, Woodend 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