Barramunga vs McCrae
Property investment comparison - Barramunga, VIC 3249 vs McCrae, VIC 3938
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Barramunga wins 2, McCrae wins 1. 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 | Barramunga | McCrae |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $1.2M | $1.2M |
| Median unit price | - | $785K |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 2.03% | 3.38% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | - | 4.30% |
| 1-year house growth | - | -7.5% |
| 3-year house growth | - | -9.4% |
| Vacancy rate | 1.1% | 4.4% |
| Population | 11 | 3,311 |
Barramunga vs McCrae: what the numbers say
The median house price is $1.2M in Barramunga and $1.2M in McCrae, so Barramunga is the cheaper entry point.
On cash flow, McCrae leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 3.38%, compared with 2.03% in Barramunga, a gap of 1.35 percentage points.
Rental vacancy is 1.1% in Barramunga and 4.4% in McCrae, so landlords in Barramunga face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.
McCrae is the bigger suburb, with a population of 3,311 against 11, roughly 301 times the size of Barramunga; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: McCrae for rental income, Barramunga for a lower purchase price, Barramunga 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