Belvedere vs Chelona
Property investment comparison - Belvedere, QLD 4860 vs Chelona, QLD 4740
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Belvedere wins 1, Chelona 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 | Belvedere | Chelona |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $510K | $500K |
| Median unit price | $395K | - |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 3.67% | 7.40% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | 5.54% | - |
| 1-year house growth | +15.1%estimate | - |
| 3-year house growth | - | - |
| Vacancy rate | 0.8% | 1.3% |
| Population | 943 | 120 |
Belvedere vs Chelona: what the numbers say
The median house price is $510K in Belvedere and $500K in Chelona, so Chelona is the cheaper entry point, with Belvedere houses about 2% dearer.
On cash flow, Chelona leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 7.40%, compared with 3.67% in Belvedere, a gap of 3.73 percentage points.
Rental vacancy is 0.8% in Belvedere and 1.3% in Chelona, so landlords in Belvedere face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.
Belvedere is the bigger suburb, with a population of 943 against 120, roughly 8 times the size of Chelona; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Chelona for rental income, Chelona for a lower purchase price, Belvedere 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