Borallon vs Ormiston
Property investment comparison - Borallon, QLD 4306 vs Ormiston, QLD 4160
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Borallon wins 1, Ormiston 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 | Borallon | Ormiston |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $1.4M | $1.4M |
| Median unit price | - | $815K |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 2.65% | 3.20% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | - | 4.20% |
| 1-year house growth | - | +10.2% |
| 3-year house growth | - | +27.3% |
| Vacancy rate | 1.3% | 1.1% |
| Population | 90 | 6,379 |
Borallon vs Ormiston: what the numbers say
The median house price is $1.4M in Borallon and $1.4M in Ormiston, so Borallon is the cheaper entry point.
On cash flow, Ormiston leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 3.20%, compared with 2.65% in Borallon, a gap of 0.55 percentage points.
Rental vacancy is 1.1% in Ormiston and 1.3% in Borallon, so landlords in Ormiston face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.
Ormiston is the bigger suburb, with a population of 6,379 against 90, roughly 71 times the size of Borallon; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Ormiston for rental income, Borallon for a lower purchase price, Ormiston 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