Ararat vs Hotspur
Property investment comparison - Ararat, VIC 3377 vs Hotspur, VIC 3303
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Ararat wins 1, Hotspur 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 | Ararat | Hotspur |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $440K | $435K |
| Median unit price | $335K | - |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 5.20% | 2.57% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | - | - |
| 1-year house growth | +13.4% | - |
| 3-year house growth | +12.0% | - |
| Vacancy rate | 1.6% | - |
| Population | 8,500 | 34 |
Ararat vs Hotspur: what the numbers say
The median house price is $440K in Ararat and $435K in Hotspur, so Hotspur is the cheaper entry point, with Ararat houses about 1% dearer.
On cash flow, Ararat leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 5.20%, compared with 2.57% in Hotspur, a gap of 2.63 percentage points.
Ararat is the bigger suburb, with a population of 8,500 against 34, roughly 250 times the size of Hotspur; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Ararat for rental income, Hotspur for a lower purchase price. 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