Skip to main content

Caloundra vs Merrimac

Property investment comparison - Caloundra, QLD 4551 vs Merrimac, QLD 4226

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Caloundra wins 1, Merrimac 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.

MetricCaloundraMerrimac
Median house price$1.2M$1.2M
Median unit price$880K-
Gross rental yield (houses)-4.03%
Gross rental yield (units)4.05%5.40%
1-year house growth+23.2%+14.9%
3-year house growth+32.5%+43.2%
Vacancy rate1.3%1.0%
Population3,9327,212

Caloundra vs Merrimac: what the numbers say

Houses cost about the same in both suburbs: the median house price is $1.2M in Caloundra and $1.2M in Merrimac.

Over the past year house prices moved +23.2% in Caloundra and +14.9% in Merrimac, so recent momentum favours Caloundra, although both suburbs recorded growth.

Looking back three years, Caloundra houses are +32.5% and Merrimac houses +43.2%, so Merrimac has compounded faster than Caloundra over the longer window.

Rental vacancy is 1.0% in Merrimac and 1.3% in Caloundra, so landlords in Merrimac face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.

Merrimac is the bigger suburb, with a population of 7,212 against 3,932, larger than Caloundra; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Caloundra for recent price momentum, Merrimac 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