Chelsea vs Timboon West
Property investment comparison - Chelsea, VIC 3196 vs Timboon West, VIC 3268
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Chelsea wins 2, Timboon West 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 | Chelsea | Timboon West |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $1.1M | $1.1M |
| Median unit price | $745K | - |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 3.25% | 2.04% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | 4.02% | - |
| 1-year house growth | +8.1%estimate | - |
| 3-year house growth | - | - |
| Vacancy rate | 1.3% | 2.6% |
| Population | 8,347 | 57 |
Chelsea vs Timboon West: what the numbers say
The median house price is $1.1M in Chelsea and $1.1M in Timboon West, so Timboon West is the cheaper entry point.
On cash flow, Chelsea leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 3.25%, compared with 2.04% in Timboon West, a gap of 1.21 percentage points.
Rental vacancy is 1.3% in Chelsea and 2.6% in Timboon West, so landlords in Chelsea face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.
Chelsea is the bigger suburb, with a population of 8,347 against 57, roughly 146 times the size of Timboon West; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Chelsea for rental income, Timboon West for a lower purchase price, Chelsea 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