Skip to main content

Chippendale vs Woolloomooloo

Property investment comparison - Chippendale, NSW 2008 vs Woolloomooloo, NSW 2011

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Chippendale wins 3, Woolloomooloo 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.

MetricChippendaleWoolloomooloo
Median house price$1.9M$1.9M
Median unit price$890K$1.1M
Gross rental yield (houses)3.25%-
Gross rental yield (units)5.80%-
1-year house growth-0.5%+1.7%
3-year house growth-+21.6%
Vacancy rate1.8%1.9%
Population7,8033,792

Chippendale vs Woolloomooloo: what the numbers say

The median house price is $1.9M in Chippendale and $1.9M in Woolloomooloo, so Chippendale is the cheaper entry point, with Woolloomooloo houses about 1% dearer.

For units, Chippendale sits at a median of $890K against $1.1M in Woolloomooloo, which makes Chippendale the more affordable unit market and Woolloomooloo the pricier one.

Over the past year house prices moved -0.5% in Chippendale and +1.7% in Woolloomooloo, so recent momentum favours Woolloomooloo, while Chippendale went backwards.

Rental vacancy is 1.8% in Chippendale and 1.9% in Woolloomooloo, so landlords in Chippendale face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.

Chippendale is the bigger suburb, with a population of 7,803 against 3,792, roughly 2.1 times the size of Woolloomooloo; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

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

Keep exploring

Compare any 2-4 Australian suburbs

Build your own multi-suburb comparison with the full interactive tool.

Open interactive comparison