Beverford vs Whittlesea
Property investment comparison - Beverford, VIC 3590 vs Whittlesea, VIC 3757
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Beverford wins 1, Whittlesea 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 | Beverford | Whittlesea |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $810K | $810K |
| Median unit price | $250K | $460K |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | - | 3.85% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | - | 5.05% |
| 1-year house growth | - | +4.8%estimate |
| 3-year house growth | - | - |
| Vacancy rate | 4.8% | 1.1% |
| Population | 337 | 6,117 |
Beverford vs Whittlesea: what the numbers say
Houses cost about the same in both suburbs: the median house price is $810K in Beverford and $810K in Whittlesea.
For units, Beverford sits at a median of $250K against $460K in Whittlesea, which makes Beverford the more affordable unit market and Whittlesea the pricier one.
Rental vacancy is 1.1% in Whittlesea and 4.8% in Beverford, so landlords in Whittlesea face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.
Whittlesea is the bigger suburb, with a population of 6,117 against 337, roughly 18 times the size of Beverford; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Whittlesea 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