Skip to main content

Ararat vs Barkly

Property investment comparison - Ararat, VIC 3377 vs Barkly, VIC 3381

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Ararat wins 3, Barkly 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.

MetricAraratBarkly
Median house price$440K$425K
Median unit price$335K$585K
Gross rental yield (houses)5.20%4.38%
Gross rental yield (units)-3.70%
1-year house growth+13.4%-
3-year house growth+12.0%-
Vacancy rate1.6%6.2%
Population8,50049

Ararat vs Barkly: what the numbers say

The median house price is $440K in Ararat and $425K in Barkly, so Barkly is the cheaper entry point, with Ararat houses about 4% dearer.

For units, Ararat sits at a median of $335K against $585K in Barkly, which makes Ararat the more affordable unit market and Barkly the pricier one.

On cash flow, Ararat leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 5.20%, compared with 4.38% in Barkly, a gap of 0.82 percentage points.

Rental vacancy is 1.6% in Ararat and 6.2% in Barkly, so landlords in Ararat face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.

Ararat is the bigger suburb, with a population of 8,500 against 49, roughly 173 times the size of Barkly; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Ararat for rental income, Barkly for a lower purchase price, Ararat 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