Anketell vs Munster
Property investment comparison - Anketell, WA 6167 vs Munster, WA 6166
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Anketell wins 0, Munster 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 | Anketell | Munster |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $810K | - |
| Median unit price | $670K | - |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 4.40% | - |
| Gross rental yield (units) | 3.00% | - |
| 1-year house growth | +20.2% | - |
| 3-year house growth | -11.7% | - |
| Vacancy rate | 2.9% | 0.3% |
| Population | 280 | 199 |
Anketell vs Munster: what the numbers say
Rental vacancy is 0.3% in Munster and 2.9% in Anketell, so landlords in Munster face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.
Anketell is the bigger suburb, with a population of 280 against 199, larger than Munster; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Munster 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