Cathcart vs Skye
Property investment comparison - Cathcart, VIC 3377 vs Skye, VIC 3977
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Cathcart wins 1, Skye 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 | Cathcart | Skye |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $855K | $860K |
| Median unit price | - | $630K |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | - | 3.99% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | - | 4.57% |
| 1-year house growth | - | +8.2% |
| 3-year house growth | - | +13.2% |
| Vacancy rate | 2.2% | 1.0% |
| Population | 110 | 8,088 |
Cathcart vs Skye: what the numbers say
The median house price is $855K in Cathcart and $860K in Skye, so Cathcart is the cheaper entry point, with Skye houses about 1% dearer.
Rental vacancy is 1.0% in Skye and 2.2% in Cathcart, so landlords in Skye face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.
Skye is the bigger suburb, with a population of 8,088 against 110, roughly 74 times the size of Cathcart; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Cathcart for a lower purchase price, Skye 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