Cobblebank vs Lucas
Property investment comparison - Cobblebank, VIC 3338 vs Lucas, VIC 3350
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Cobblebank wins 0, Lucas wins 4. 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 | Cobblebank | Lucas |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $645K | $645K |
| Median unit price | - | $375K |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | - | 3.91% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | 4.40% | 5.30% |
| 1-year house growth | +3.5% | +4.0% |
| 3-year house growth | -1.3% | +0.8% |
| Vacancy rate | 2.2% | 0.8% |
| Population | 3,601 | 2,994 |
Cobblebank vs Lucas: what the numbers say
Houses cost about the same in both suburbs: the median house price is $645K in Cobblebank and $645K in Lucas.
Over the past year house prices moved +3.5% in Cobblebank and +4.0% in Lucas, so recent momentum favours Lucas, although both suburbs recorded growth.
Looking back three years, Cobblebank houses are -1.3% and Lucas houses +0.8%, so Lucas has compounded faster than Cobblebank over the longer window.
Rental vacancy is 0.8% in Lucas and 2.2% in Cobblebank, so landlords in Lucas face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.
Cobblebank is the bigger suburb, with a population of 3,601 against 2,994, larger than Lucas; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Lucas for recent price momentum, Lucas 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