Barjarg vs Newport
Property investment comparison - Barjarg, VIC 3723 vs Newport, VIC 3015
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Barjarg wins 0, Newport 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 | Barjarg | Newport |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $1.2M | $1.2M |
| Median unit price | - | - |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 1.91% | 3.23% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | - | 4.31% |
| 1-year house growth | - | +1.2% |
| 3-year house growth | - | -2.4% |
| Vacancy rate | 13.2% | 2.3% |
| Population | 141 | 13,658 |
Barjarg vs Newport: what the numbers say
Houses cost about the same in both suburbs: the median house price is $1.2M in Barjarg and $1.2M in Newport.
On cash flow, Newport leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 3.23%, compared with 1.91% in Barjarg, a gap of 1.32 percentage points.
Rental vacancy is 2.3% in Newport and 13.2% in Barjarg, so landlords in Newport face less competition for tenants.
Newport is the bigger suburb, with a population of 13,658 against 141, roughly 97 times the size of Barjarg; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Newport for rental income, Newport 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