Skip to main content

Clarkson vs Kenwick

Property investment comparison - Clarkson, WA 6030 vs Kenwick, WA 6107

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Clarkson wins 2, Kenwick 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.

MetricClarksonKenwick
Median house price$850K$850K
Median unit price$630K$650K
Gross rental yield (houses)4.35%-
Gross rental yield (units)5.20%5.20%
1-year house growth+17.2%+22.2%estimate
3-year house growth+75.6%-
Vacancy rate1.1%1.6%
Population13,9045,684

Clarkson vs Kenwick: what the numbers say

Houses cost about the same in both suburbs: the median house price is $850K in Clarkson and $850K in Kenwick.

For units, Clarkson sits at a median of $630K against $650K in Kenwick, which makes Clarkson the more affordable unit market and Kenwick the pricier one.

Over the past year house prices moved +17.2% in Clarkson and +22.2% in Kenwick (an estimate), so recent momentum favours Kenwick, although both suburbs recorded growth.

Rental vacancy is 1.1% in Clarkson and 1.6% in Kenwick, so landlords in Clarkson face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.

Clarkson is the bigger suburb, with a population of 13,904 against 5,684, roughly 2.4 times the size of Kenwick; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Kenwick for recent price momentum, Clarkson 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