Charlemont vs Cobblebank
Property investment comparison - Charlemont, VIC 3217 vs Cobblebank, VIC 3338
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Charlemont wins 1, Cobblebank 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.
| Metric | Charlemont | Cobblebank |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $645K | $645K |
| Median unit price | $475K | - |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 4.20% | - |
| Gross rental yield (units) | 2.67% | 4.40% |
| 1-year house growth | +2.5% | +3.5% |
| 3-year house growth | +4.9% | -1.3% |
| Vacancy rate | 2.4% | 2.2% |
| Population | 2,612 | 3,601 |
Charlemont vs Cobblebank: what the numbers say
Houses cost about the same in both suburbs: the median house price is $645K in Charlemont and $645K in Cobblebank.
Over the past year house prices moved +2.5% in Charlemont and +3.5% in Cobblebank, so recent momentum favours Cobblebank, although both suburbs recorded growth.
Looking back three years, Charlemont houses are +4.9% and Cobblebank houses -1.3%, so Charlemont has compounded faster than Cobblebank over the longer window.
Rental vacancy is 2.2% in Cobblebank and 2.4% in Charlemont, so landlords in Cobblebank face less competition for tenants.
Cobblebank is the bigger suburb, with a population of 3,601 against 2,612, larger than Charlemont; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Cobblebank for recent price momentum, Cobblebank 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