Ashby vs Caversham
Property investment comparison - Ashby, WA 6065 vs Caversham, WA 6055
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Ashby wins 1, Caversham 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.
| Metric | Ashby | Caversham |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $930K | $920K |
| Median unit price | - | - |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 4.10% | 4.40% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | 4.95% | 4.96% |
| 1-year house growth | - | +14.3% |
| 3-year house growth | - | +68.1% |
| Vacancy rate | 0.9% | 1.8% |
| Population | 2,850 | 7,419 |
Ashby vs Caversham: what the numbers say
The median house price is $930K in Ashby and $920K in Caversham, so Caversham is the cheaper entry point, with Ashby houses about 1% dearer.
On cash flow, Caversham leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 4.40%, compared with 4.10% in Ashby, a gap of 0.30 percentage points.
Rental vacancy is 0.9% in Ashby and 1.8% in Caversham, so landlords in Ashby face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.
Caversham is the bigger suburb, with a population of 7,419 against 2,850, roughly 2.6 times the size of Ashby; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Caversham for rental income, Caversham for a lower purchase price, Ashby 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