Skip to main content

California Gully vs Melville Forest

Property investment comparison - California Gully, VIC 3556 vs Melville Forest, VIC 3315

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: California Gully wins 2, Melville Forest 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 GullyMelville Forest
Median house price$580K$575K
Median unit price--
Gross rental yield (houses)4.52%3.91%
Gross rental yield (units)--
1-year house growth+14.6%-
3-year house growth+22.3%-
Vacancy rate0.7%1.4%
Population4,47663

California Gully vs Melville Forest: what the numbers say

The median house price is $580K in California Gully and $575K in Melville Forest, so Melville Forest is the cheaper entry point, with California Gully houses about 1% dearer.

On cash flow, California Gully leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 4.52%, compared with 3.91% in Melville Forest, a gap of 0.61 percentage points.

Rental vacancy is 0.7% in California Gully and 1.4% in Melville Forest, 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 63, roughly 71 times the size of Melville Forest; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: California Gully for rental income, Melville Forest for a lower purchase price, 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