Skip to main content

Bardon vs Camp Mountain

Property investment comparison - Bardon, QLD 4065 vs Camp Mountain, QLD 4520

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Bardon wins 2, Camp Mountain 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.

MetricBardonCamp Mountain
Median house price$2.1M$2.2M
Median unit price$1.2M$720K
Gross rental yield (houses)2.54%-
Gross rental yield (units)2.99%4.48%
1-year house growth+11.8%+15.1%estimate
3-year house growth+19.2%-
Vacancy rate1.0%11.5%
Population10,1531,447

Bardon vs Camp Mountain: what the numbers say

The median house price is $2.1M in Bardon and $2.2M in Camp Mountain, so Bardon is the cheaper entry point, with Camp Mountain houses about 2% dearer.

For units, Bardon sits at a median of $1.2M against $720K in Camp Mountain, which makes Camp Mountain the more affordable unit market and Bardon the pricier one.

Over the past year house prices moved +11.8% in Bardon and +15.1% in Camp Mountain (an estimate), so recent momentum favours Camp Mountain, although both suburbs recorded growth.

Rental vacancy is 1.0% in Bardon and 11.5% in Camp Mountain, so landlords in Bardon face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.

Bardon is the bigger suburb, with a population of 10,153 against 1,447, roughly 7 times the size of Camp Mountain; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Bardon for a lower purchase price, Camp Mountain for recent price momentum, Bardon 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