Skip to main content

Bateman vs Doubleview

Property investment comparison - Bateman, WA 6150 vs Doubleview, WA 6018

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Bateman wins 0, Doubleview wins 4. 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.

MetricBatemanDoubleview
Median house price$1.6M$1.5M
Median unit price-$905K
Gross rental yield (houses)2.87%3.45%
Gross rental yield (units)--
1-year house growth+19.4%estimate+23.2%
3-year house growth-+67.2%
Vacancy rate2.0%0.4%
Population3,8329,205

Bateman vs Doubleview: what the numbers say

The median house price is $1.6M in Bateman and $1.5M in Doubleview, so Doubleview is the cheaper entry point, with Bateman houses about 2% dearer.

On cash flow, Doubleview leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 3.45%, compared with 2.87% in Bateman, a gap of 0.58 percentage points.

Over the past year house prices moved +19.4% in Bateman (an estimate) and +23.2% in Doubleview, so recent momentum favours Doubleview, although both suburbs recorded growth.

Rental vacancy is 0.4% in Doubleview and 2.0% in Bateman, so landlords in Doubleview face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.

Doubleview is the bigger suburb, with a population of 9,205 against 3,832, roughly 2.4 times the size of Bateman; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Doubleview for rental income, Doubleview for a lower purchase price, Doubleview for recent price momentum, Doubleview 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