Charlton vs W Tree
Property investment comparison - Charlton, VIC 3525 vs W Tree, VIC 3885
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Charlton wins 2, W Tree 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 | W Tree |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $330K | $340K |
| Median unit price | $330K | - |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 6.95% | 8.36% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | 2.49% | - |
| 1-year house growth | +8.2% | - |
| 3-year house growth | +0.0% | - |
| Vacancy rate | 1.7% | 2.8% |
| Population | 1,095 | 47 |
Charlton vs W Tree: what the numbers say
The median house price is $330K in Charlton and $340K in W Tree, so Charlton is the cheaper entry point, with W Tree houses about 3% dearer.
On cash flow, W Tree leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 8.36%, compared with 6.95% in Charlton, a gap of 1.41 percentage points.
Rental vacancy is 1.7% in Charlton and 2.8% in W Tree, so landlords in Charlton face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.
Charlton is the bigger suburb, with a population of 1,095 against 47, roughly 23 times the size of W Tree; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: W Tree for rental income, Charlton for a lower purchase price, 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