Skip to main content

Churchill vs Wahgunyah

Property investment comparison - Churchill, VIC 3842 vs Wahgunyah, VIC 3687

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Churchill wins 4, Wahgunyah wins 2. 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.

MetricChurchillWahgunyah
Median house price$460K$470K
Median unit price$430K$540K
Gross rental yield (houses)5.08%4.66%
Gross rental yield (units)3.45%3.68%
1-year house growth+17.9%-9.7%estimate
3-year house growth+27.7%-
Vacancy rate2.3%2.3%
Population4,9241,061

Churchill vs Wahgunyah: what the numbers say

The median house price is $460K in Churchill and $470K in Wahgunyah, so Churchill is the cheaper entry point, with Wahgunyah houses about 2% dearer.

For units, Churchill sits at a median of $430K against $540K in Wahgunyah, which makes Churchill the more affordable unit market and Wahgunyah the pricier one.

On cash flow, Churchill leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 5.08%, compared with 4.66% in Wahgunyah, a gap of 0.42 percentage points.

Over the past year house prices moved +17.9% in Churchill and -9.7% in Wahgunyah (an estimate), so recent momentum favours Churchill, while Wahgunyah went backwards.

Rental vacancy is 2.3% in Wahgunyah and 2.3% in Churchill, so landlords in Wahgunyah face less competition for tenants.

Churchill is the bigger suburb, with a population of 4,924 against 1,061, roughly 4.6 times the size of Wahgunyah; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Churchill for rental income, Churchill for a lower purchase price, Churchill for recent price momentum, Wahgunyah 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