Skip to main content

Cedar Vale vs Fassifern Valley

Property investment comparison - Cedar Vale, QLD 4285 vs Fassifern Valley, QLD 4309

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Cedar Vale wins 1, Fassifern Valley 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.

MetricCedar ValeFassifern Valley
Median house price$1.1M$1.1M
Median unit price$2.8M-
Gross rental yield (houses)3.09%3.31%
Gross rental yield (units)--
1-year house growth+17.8%estimate-
3-year house growth--
Vacancy rate0.8%2.2%
Population2,856112

Cedar Vale vs Fassifern Valley: what the numbers say

The median house price is $1.1M in Cedar Vale and $1.1M in Fassifern Valley, so Fassifern Valley is the cheaper entry point.

On cash flow, Fassifern Valley leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 3.31%, compared with 3.09% in Cedar Vale, a gap of 0.22 percentage points.

Rental vacancy is 0.8% in Cedar Vale and 2.2% in Fassifern Valley, so landlords in Cedar Vale face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.

Cedar Vale is the bigger suburb, with a population of 2,856 against 112, roughly 26 times the size of Fassifern Valley; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Fassifern Valley for rental income, Fassifern Valley for a lower purchase price, Cedar Vale 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