Charlton vs Redcliffe
Property investment comparison - Charlton, QLD 4350 vs Redcliffe, QLD 4020
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Charlton wins 1, Redcliffe 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 | Charlton | Redcliffe |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $1.0M | $1.0M |
| Median unit price | - | $870K |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 2.91% | 3.25% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | - | 3.76% |
| 1-year house growth | - | +14.5% |
| 3-year house growth | - | +38.4% |
| Vacancy rate | 0.4% | 1.6% |
| Population | 107 | 10,460 |
Charlton vs Redcliffe: what the numbers say
Houses cost about the same in both suburbs: the median house price is $1.0M in Charlton and $1.0M in Redcliffe.
On cash flow, Redcliffe leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 3.25%, compared with 2.91% in Charlton, a gap of 0.34 percentage points.
Rental vacancy is 0.4% in Charlton and 1.6% in Redcliffe, so landlords in Charlton face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.
Redcliffe is the bigger suburb, with a population of 10,460 against 107, roughly 98 times the size of Charlton; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Redcliffe for rental income, Charlton 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