Skip to main content

Ararat vs Koroop

Property investment comparison - Ararat, VIC 3377 vs Koroop, VIC 3579

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Ararat wins 1, Koroop 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.

MetricAraratKoroop
Median house price$440K$435K
Median unit price$335K$215K
Gross rental yield (houses)5.20%4.33%
Gross rental yield (units)-5.55%
1-year house growth+13.4%-
3-year house growth+12.0%-
Vacancy rate1.6%0.8%
Population8,50063

Ararat vs Koroop: what the numbers say

The median house price is $440K in Ararat and $435K in Koroop, so Koroop is the cheaper entry point, with Ararat houses about 1% dearer.

For units, Ararat sits at a median of $335K against $215K in Koroop, which makes Koroop the more affordable unit market and Ararat the pricier one.

On cash flow, Ararat leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 5.20%, compared with 4.33% in Koroop, a gap of 0.87 percentage points.

Rental vacancy is 0.8% in Koroop and 1.6% in Ararat, so landlords in Koroop 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 63, roughly 135 times the size of Koroop; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

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