Buffalo vs Kurunjang
Property investment comparison - Buffalo, VIC 3958 vs Kurunjang, VIC 3337
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Buffalo wins 1, Kurunjang 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 | Buffalo | Kurunjang |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $615K | $620K |
| Median unit price | $990K | $450K |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | - | 3.64% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | - | 4.80% |
| 1-year house growth | - | +12.8% |
| 3-year house growth | - | +18.3% |
| Vacancy rate | 3.5% | 2.4% |
| Population | 284 | 10,711 |
Buffalo vs Kurunjang: what the numbers say
The median house price is $615K in Buffalo and $620K in Kurunjang, so Buffalo is the cheaper entry point, with Kurunjang houses about 1% dearer.
For units, Buffalo sits at a median of $990K against $450K in Kurunjang, which makes Kurunjang the more affordable unit market and Buffalo the pricier one.
Rental vacancy is 2.4% in Kurunjang and 3.5% in Buffalo, so landlords in Kurunjang face less competition for tenants.
Kurunjang is the bigger suburb, with a population of 10,711 against 284, roughly 38 times the size of Buffalo; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Buffalo for a lower purchase price, Kurunjang 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