Skip to main content

California Gully vs Chepstowe

Property investment comparison - California Gully, VIC 3556 vs Chepstowe, VIC 3351

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: California Gully wins 1, Chepstowe 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.

MetricCalifornia GullyChepstowe
Median house price$580K$580K
Median unit price--
Gross rental yield (houses)4.52%5.32%
Gross rental yield (units)--
1-year house growth+14.6%-
3-year house growth+22.3%-
Vacancy rate0.7%6.8%
Population4,47660

California Gully vs Chepstowe: what the numbers say

Houses cost about the same in both suburbs: the median house price is $580K in California Gully and $580K in Chepstowe.

On cash flow, Chepstowe leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 5.32%, compared with 4.52% in California Gully, a gap of 0.80 percentage points.

Rental vacancy is 0.7% in California Gully and 6.8% in Chepstowe, so landlords in California Gully face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.

California Gully is the bigger suburb, with a population of 4,476 against 60, roughly 75 times the size of Chepstowe; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Chepstowe for rental income, California Gully 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