Chelsea vs Mulgrave

The median house price is $1.1M in Chelsea and $1.1M in Mulgrave, so Chelsea is the cheaper entry point, with Mulgrave houses about 1% dearer.

For units, Chelsea sits at a median of $745K against $850K in Mulgrave, which makes Chelsea the more affordable unit market and Mulgrave the pricier one.

On cash flow, Chelsea leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 3.25%, compared with 3.14% in Mulgrave, a gap of 0.11 percentage points.

Over the past year house prices moved +8.1% in Chelsea (an estimate) and +2.3% in Mulgrave, so recent momentum favours Chelsea, although both suburbs recorded growth.

Rental vacancy is 1.3% in Chelsea and 1.9% in Mulgrave, so landlords in Chelsea face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.

Mulgrave is the bigger suburb, with a population of 19,889 against 8,347, roughly 2.4 times the size of Chelsea; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Chelsea for rental income, Chelsea for a lower purchase price, Chelsea for recent price momentum, Chelsea for the tighter rental market. Which matters more depends on whether the investor is buying for cash flow, capital growth or affordability.