Bulart vs Warburton
Property investment comparison - Bulart, VIC 3314 vs Warburton, VIC 3799
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Bulart wins 0, Warburton 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 | Bulart | Warburton |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $695K | $695K |
| Median unit price | - | $405K |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 2.77% | 4.22% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | - | 3.51% |
| 1-year house growth | - | +0.4% |
| 3-year house growth | - | +0.0% |
| Vacancy rate | 8.2% | 0.3% |
| Population | 104 | 2,020 |
Bulart vs Warburton: what the numbers say
Houses cost about the same in both suburbs: the median house price is $695K in Bulart and $695K in Warburton.
On cash flow, Warburton leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 4.22%, compared with 2.77% in Bulart, a gap of 1.45 percentage points.
Rental vacancy is 0.3% in Warburton and 8.2% in Bulart, so landlords in Warburton face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.
Warburton is the bigger suburb, with a population of 2,020 against 104, roughly 19 times the size of Bulart; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Warburton for rental income, Warburton 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