Bonang vs Maffra
Property investment comparison - Bonang, VIC 3888 vs Maffra, VIC 3860
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Bonang wins 1, Maffra 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 | Bonang | Maffra |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $505K | $500K |
| Median unit price | - | $360K |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 4.77% | 4.98% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | - | - |
| 1-year house growth | - | +12.5% |
| 3-year house growth | - | +10.6% |
| Vacancy rate | 0.8% | 1.5% |
| Population | 52 | 5,384 |
Bonang vs Maffra: what the numbers say
The median house price is $505K in Bonang and $500K in Maffra, so Maffra is the cheaper entry point, with Bonang houses about 1% dearer.
On cash flow, Maffra leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 4.98%, compared with 4.77% in Bonang, a gap of 0.21 percentage points.
Rental vacancy is 0.8% in Bonang and 1.5% in Maffra, so landlords in Bonang face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.
Maffra is the bigger suburb, with a population of 5,384 against 52, roughly 104 times the size of Bonang; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Maffra for rental income, Maffra for a lower purchase price, Bonang 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