Skip to main content

Caloundra vs Rifle Range

Property investment comparison - Caloundra, QLD 4551 vs Rifle Range, QLD 4311

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Caloundra wins 2, Rifle Range 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.

MetricCaloundraRifle Range
Median house price$1.2M$1.2M
Median unit price$880K-
Gross rental yield (houses)-2.73%
Gross rental yield (units)4.05%-
1-year house growth+23.2%+16.0%
3-year house growth+32.5%+61.6%
Vacancy rate1.3%8.5%
Population3,932197

Caloundra vs Rifle Range: 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 Rifle Range.

Over the past year house prices moved +23.2% in Caloundra and +16.0% in Rifle Range, so recent momentum favours Caloundra, although both suburbs recorded growth.

Looking back three years, Caloundra houses are +32.5% and Rifle Range houses +61.6%, so Rifle Range has compounded faster than Caloundra over the longer window.

Rental vacancy is 1.3% in Caloundra and 8.5% in Rifle Range, so landlords in Caloundra face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.

Caloundra is the bigger suburb, with a population of 3,932 against 197, roughly 20 times the size of Rifle Range; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Caloundra for recent price momentum, Caloundra 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
Caloundra vs Rifle Range: Suburb Comparison 2026