Skip to main content

Coburg vs Little Hampton

Property investment comparison - Coburg, VIC 3058 vs Little Hampton, VIC 3458

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Coburg wins 2, Little Hampton 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.

MetricCoburgLittle Hampton
Median house price$1.3M$1.2M
Median unit price$590K-
Gross rental yield (houses)3.12%2.29%
Gross rental yield (units)5.10%-
1-year house growth+3.0%estimate-
3-year house growth--
Vacancy rate1.4%2.6%
Population26,57474

Coburg vs Little Hampton: what the numbers say

The median house price is $1.3M in Coburg and $1.2M in Little Hampton, so Little Hampton is the cheaper entry point.

On cash flow, Coburg leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 3.12%, compared with 2.29% in Little Hampton, a gap of 0.83 percentage points.

Rental vacancy is 1.4% in Coburg and 2.6% in Little Hampton, so landlords in Coburg face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.

Coburg is the bigger suburb, with a population of 26,574 against 74, roughly 359 times the size of Little Hampton; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Coburg for rental income, Little Hampton for a lower purchase price, Coburg 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