Burnbank vs Portland
Property investment comparison - Burnbank, VIC 3371 vs Portland, VIC 3305
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Burnbank wins 1, Portland 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.
| Metric | Burnbank | Portland |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $485K | $490K |
| Median unit price | - | $260K |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | - | 5.31% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | - | - |
| 1-year house growth | - | +18.9% |
| 3-year house growth | - | +7.1% |
| Vacancy rate | 2.8% | 0.6% |
| Population | 47 | 10,016 |
Burnbank vs Portland: what the numbers say
The median house price is $485K in Burnbank and $490K in Portland, so Burnbank is the cheaper entry point, with Portland houses about 1% dearer.
Rental vacancy is 0.6% in Portland and 2.8% in Burnbank, so landlords in Portland face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.
Portland is the bigger suburb, with a population of 10,016 against 47, roughly 213 times the size of Burnbank; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Burnbank for a lower purchase price, Portland 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