Bullarook vs Mulgrave
Property investment comparison - Bullarook, VIC 3352 vs Mulgrave, VIC 3170
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Bullarook wins 1, Mulgrave 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 | Bullarook | Mulgrave |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $1.1M | $1.1M |
| Median unit price | - | $850K |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 1.91% | 3.14% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | - | - |
| 1-year house growth | - | +2.3% |
| 3-year house growth | - | +14.7% |
| Vacancy rate | 1.6% | 1.9% |
| Population | 77 | 19,889 |
Bullarook vs Mulgrave: what the numbers say
The median house price is $1.1M in Bullarook and $1.1M in Mulgrave, so Mulgrave is the cheaper entry point, with Bullarook houses about 1% dearer.
On cash flow, Mulgrave leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 3.14%, compared with 1.91% in Bullarook, a gap of 1.23 percentage points.
Rental vacancy is 1.6% in Bullarook and 1.9% in Mulgrave, so landlords in Bullarook face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.
Mulgrave is the bigger suburb, with a population of 19,889 against 77, roughly 258 times the size of Bullarook; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Mulgrave for rental income, Mulgrave for a lower purchase price, Bullarook 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