Skip to main content

Baxter vs Mernda

Property investment comparison - Baxter, VIC 3911 vs Mernda, VIC 3754

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Baxter wins 2, Mernda 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.

MetricBaxterMernda
Median house price$755K$750K
Median unit price-$500K
Gross rental yield (houses)4.05%3.81%
Gross rental yield (units)3.30%4.95%
1-year house growth+0.8%+4.9%estimate
3-year house growth+11.2%-
Vacancy rate1.1%2.0%
Population2,16623,369

Baxter vs Mernda: what the numbers say

The median house price is $755K in Baxter and $750K in Mernda, so Mernda is the cheaper entry point, with Baxter houses about 1% dearer.

On cash flow, Baxter leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 4.05%, compared with 3.81% in Mernda, a gap of 0.24 percentage points.

Over the past year house prices moved +0.8% in Baxter and +4.9% in Mernda (an estimate), so recent momentum favours Mernda, although both suburbs recorded growth.

Rental vacancy is 1.1% in Baxter and 2.0% in Mernda, so landlords in Baxter face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.

Mernda is the bigger suburb, with a population of 23,369 against 2,166, roughly 11 times the size of Baxter; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

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