Skip to main content

Bundamba vs Cape Hillsborough

Property investment comparison - Bundamba, QLD 4304 vs Cape Hillsborough, QLD 4740

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Bundamba wins 2, Cape Hillsborough wins 1. 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.

MetricBundambaCape Hillsborough
Median house price$820K$825K
Median unit price$670K-
Gross rental yield (houses)3.82%4.00%
Gross rental yield (units)4.07%-
1-year house growth+19.3%-
3-year house growth+70.3%-
Vacancy rate1.5%1.6%
Population6,54239

Bundamba vs Cape Hillsborough: what the numbers say

The median house price is $820K in Bundamba and $825K in Cape Hillsborough, so Bundamba is the cheaper entry point, with Cape Hillsborough houses about 1% dearer.

On cash flow, Cape Hillsborough leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 4.00%, compared with 3.82% in Bundamba, a gap of 0.18 percentage points.

Rental vacancy is 1.5% in Bundamba and 1.6% in Cape Hillsborough, so landlords in Bundamba face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.

Bundamba is the bigger suburb, with a population of 6,542 against 39, roughly 168 times the size of Cape Hillsborough; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Cape Hillsborough for rental income, Bundamba for a lower purchase price, Bundamba for the tighter rental market. Which matters more depends on whether the investor is buying for cash flow, capital growth or affordability.

Keep exploring

Compare any 2-4 Australian suburbs

Build your own multi-suburb comparison with the full interactive tool.

Open interactive comparison