Bellfield vs Eastwood
Property investment comparison - Bellfield, VIC 3381 vs Eastwood, VIC 3875
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Bellfield wins 0, Eastwood 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 | Bellfield | Eastwood |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $635K | $635K |
| Median unit price | - | $440K |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 3.10% | 4.20% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | - | 4.39% |
| 1-year house growth | - | +4.3% |
| 3-year house growth | - | +3.5% |
| Vacancy rate | 6.4% | 2.2% |
| Population | 1,996 | 2,855 |
Bellfield vs Eastwood: what the numbers say
Houses cost about the same in both suburbs: the median house price is $635K in Bellfield and $635K in Eastwood.
On cash flow, Eastwood leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 4.20%, compared with 3.10% in Bellfield, a gap of 1.10 percentage points.
Rental vacancy is 2.2% in Eastwood and 6.4% in Bellfield, so landlords in Eastwood face less competition for tenants.
Eastwood is the bigger suburb, with a population of 2,855 against 1,996, larger than Bellfield; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Eastwood for rental income, Eastwood 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