Camira vs Green Hill
Property investment comparison - Camira, QLD 4300 vs Green Hill, QLD 4865
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Camira wins 1, Green Hill wins 2. 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 | Camira | Green Hill |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $1.0M | $1.0M |
| Median unit price | $715K | - |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 3.50% | 4.14% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | 3.72% | - |
| 1-year house growth | +15.6% | - |
| 3-year house growth | +42.2% | - |
| Vacancy rate | 0.8% | 1.2% |
| Population | 7,415 | 177 |
Camira vs Green Hill: what the numbers say
The median house price is $1.0M in Camira and $1.0M in Green Hill, so Green Hill is the cheaper entry point.
On cash flow, Green Hill leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 4.14%, compared with 3.50% in Camira, a gap of 0.64 percentage points.
Rental vacancy is 0.8% in Camira and 1.2% in Green Hill, so landlords in Camira face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.
Camira is the bigger suburb, with a population of 7,415 against 177, roughly 42 times the size of Green Hill; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Green Hill for rental income, Green Hill for a lower purchase price, Camira 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