Skip to main content

Caloola vs Maclean

Property investment comparison - Caloola, NSW 2795 vs Maclean, NSW 2463

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Caloola wins 2, Maclean wins 3. 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.

MetricCaloolaMaclean
Median house price$675K$680K
Median unit price$445K$440K
Gross rental yield (houses)4.24%4.28%
Gross rental yield (units)5.64%5.50%
1-year house growth-+5.3%estimate
3-year house growth--
Vacancy rate0.8%0.7%
Population622,778

Caloola vs Maclean: what the numbers say

The median house price is $675K in Caloola and $680K in Maclean, so Caloola is the cheaper entry point, with Maclean houses about 1% dearer.

For units, Caloola sits at a median of $445K against $440K in Maclean, which makes Maclean the more affordable unit market and Caloola the pricier one.

Gross rental yield on houses is effectively level, at 4.24% in Caloola and 4.28% in Maclean, so neither suburb has a cash flow edge on houses.

Rental vacancy is 0.7% in Maclean and 0.8% in Caloola, so landlords in Maclean face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.

Maclean is the bigger suburb, with a population of 2,778 against 62, roughly 45 times the size of Caloola; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Caloola for a lower purchase price, Maclean 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