Chepstowe vs White Hills
Property investment comparison - Chepstowe, VIC 3351 vs White Hills, VIC 3550
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Chepstowe wins 1, White Hills 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 | Chepstowe | White Hills |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $580K | $580K |
| Median unit price | - | $480K |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 5.32% | 4.60% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | - | 5.00% |
| 1-year house growth | - | +9.7% |
| 3-year house growth | - | +15.8% |
| Vacancy rate | 6.8% | 0.9% |
| Population | 60 | 3,620 |
Chepstowe vs White Hills: what the numbers say
Houses cost about the same in both suburbs: the median house price is $580K in Chepstowe and $580K in White Hills.
On cash flow, Chepstowe leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 5.32%, compared with 4.60% in White Hills, a gap of 0.72 percentage points.
Rental vacancy is 0.9% in White Hills and 6.8% in Chepstowe, so landlords in White Hills face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.
White Hills is the bigger suburb, with a population of 3,620 against 60, roughly 60 times the size of Chepstowe; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Chepstowe for rental income, White Hills 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