Clinton vs Wandal
Property investment comparison - Clinton, QLD 4680 vs Wandal, QLD 4700
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Clinton wins 2, Wandal 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 | Clinton | Wandal |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $600K | $600K |
| Median unit price | $455K | - |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 4.83% | - |
| Gross rental yield (units) | 4.56% | - |
| 1-year house growth | +14.2% | +14.0% |
| 3-year house growth | +59.9% | +66.8% |
| Vacancy rate | 1.4% | 2.0% |
| Population | 6,170 | 3,949 |
Clinton vs Wandal: what the numbers say
Houses cost about the same in both suburbs: the median house price is $600K in Clinton and $600K in Wandal.
Over the past year house prices moved +14.2% in Clinton and +14.0% in Wandal, so recent momentum favours Clinton, although both suburbs recorded growth.
Looking back three years, Clinton houses are +59.9% and Wandal houses +66.8%, so Wandal has compounded faster than Clinton over the longer window.
Rental vacancy is 1.4% in Clinton and 2.0% in Wandal, so landlords in Clinton face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.
Clinton is the bigger suburb, with a population of 6,170 against 3,949, larger than Wandal; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Clinton for recent price momentum, Clinton 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