Skip to main content

Anketell vs Midland

Property investment comparison - Anketell, WA 6167 vs Midland, WA 6056

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Anketell wins 0, Midland wins 5. 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.

MetricAnketellMidland
Median house price$810K-
Median unit price$670K$580K
Gross rental yield (houses)4.40%4.75%
Gross rental yield (units)3.00%5.40%
1-year house growth+20.2%+23.2%estimate
3-year house growth-11.7%-
Vacancy rate2.9%0.3%
Population2806,335

Anketell vs Midland: what the numbers say

For units, Anketell sits at a median of $670K against $580K in Midland, which makes Midland the more affordable unit market and Anketell the pricier one.

On cash flow, Midland leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 4.75%, compared with 4.40% in Anketell, a gap of 0.35 percentage points.

Over the past year house prices moved +20.2% in Anketell and +23.2% in Midland (an estimate), so recent momentum favours Midland, although both suburbs recorded growth.

Rental vacancy is 0.3% in Midland and 2.9% in Anketell, so landlords in Midland face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.

Midland is the bigger suburb, with a population of 6,335 against 280, roughly 23 times the size of Anketell; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Midland for rental income, Midland for recent price momentum, Midland 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