Caloola vs Dubbo
Property investment comparison - Caloola, NSW 2795 vs Dubbo, NSW 2830
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Caloola wins 2, Dubbo 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 | Caloola | Dubbo |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $675K | $680K |
| Median unit price | $445K | - |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 4.24% | 4.40% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | 5.64% | - |
| 1-year house growth | - | +20.5% |
| 3-year house growth | - | +9.9% |
| Vacancy rate | 0.8% | 1.6% |
| Population | 62 | 43,516 |
Caloola vs Dubbo: what the numbers say
The median house price is $675K in Caloola and $680K in Dubbo, so Caloola is the cheaper entry point, with Dubbo houses about 1% dearer.
On cash flow, Dubbo leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 4.40%, compared with 4.24% in Caloola, a gap of 0.16 percentage points.
Rental vacancy is 0.8% in Caloola and 1.6% in Dubbo, so landlords in Caloola face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.
Dubbo is the bigger suburb, with a population of 43,516 against 62, roughly 702 times the size of Caloola; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Dubbo for rental income, Caloola for a lower purchase price, Caloola 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