Skip to main content

Ascot vs Hoppers Crossing

Property investment comparison - Ascot, VIC 3551 vs Hoppers Crossing, VIC 3029

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Ascot wins 4, Hoppers Crossing wins 0. 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.

MetricAscotHoppers Crossing
Median house price$700K$700K
Median unit price-$490K
Gross rental yield (houses)4.30%-
Gross rental yield (units)4.57%4.35%
1-year house growth+11.1%+8.4%
3-year house growth+14.7%+13.0%
Vacancy rate1.1%2.1%
Population2,57137,216

Ascot vs Hoppers Crossing: what the numbers say

Houses cost about the same in both suburbs: the median house price is $700K in Ascot and $700K in Hoppers Crossing.

Over the past year house prices moved +11.1% in Ascot and +8.4% in Hoppers Crossing, so recent momentum favours Ascot, although both suburbs recorded growth.

Looking back three years, Ascot houses are +14.7% and Hoppers Crossing houses +13.0%, so Ascot has compounded faster than Hoppers Crossing over the longer window.

Rental vacancy is 1.1% in Ascot and 2.1% in Hoppers Crossing, so landlords in Ascot face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.

Hoppers Crossing is the bigger suburb, with a population of 37,216 against 2,571, roughly 14 times the size of Ascot; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Ascot for recent price momentum, Ascot 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
Ascot vs Hoppers Crossing: Suburb Comparison 2026