Calivil vs Rushworth
Property investment comparison - Calivil, VIC 3573 vs Rushworth, VIC 3612
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Calivil wins 2, Rushworth wins 0. 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 | Calivil | Rushworth |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $350K | $370K |
| Median unit price | - | $310K |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 6.80% | 5.33% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | - | 3.09% |
| 1-year house growth | - | +5.8% |
| 3-year house growth | - | -8.0% |
| Vacancy rate | - | 1.8% |
| Population | 178 | 1,411 |
Calivil vs Rushworth: what the numbers say
The median house price is $350K in Calivil and $370K in Rushworth, so Calivil is the cheaper entry point, with Rushworth houses about 6% dearer.
On cash flow, Calivil leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 6.80%, compared with 5.33% in Rushworth, a gap of 1.47 percentage points.
Rushworth is the bigger suburb, with a population of 1,411 against 178, roughly 8 times the size of Calivil; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Calivil for rental income, Calivil for a lower purchase price. 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