Avoca vs Murra Warra
Property investment comparison - Avoca, VIC 3467 vs Murra Warra, VIC 3401
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Avoca wins 0, Murra Warra wins 2. 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 | Avoca | Murra Warra |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $400K | $385K |
| Median unit price | $320K | - |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 5.06% | 5.23% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | 2.61% | - |
| 1-year house growth | +6.0%estimate | - |
| 3-year house growth | - | - |
| Vacancy rate | 0.9% | - |
| Population | 1,356 | 63 |
Avoca vs Murra Warra: what the numbers say
The median house price is $400K in Avoca and $385K in Murra Warra, so Murra Warra is the cheaper entry point, with Avoca houses about 4% dearer.
On cash flow, Murra Warra leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 5.23%, compared with 5.06% in Avoca, a gap of 0.17 percentage points.
Avoca is the bigger suburb, with a population of 1,356 against 63, roughly 22 times the size of Murra Warra; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Murra Warra for rental income, Murra Warra 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