Cook vs Crace
Property investment comparison - Cook, ACT 2614 vs Crace, ACT 2911
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Cook wins 1, Crace 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 | Cook | Crace |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $1.1M | $1.1M |
| Median unit price | - | $435K |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 3.22% | - |
| Gross rental yield (units) | 4.10% | 6.62% |
| 1-year house growth | -2.7% | -2.3% |
| 3-year house growth | +17.7% | +29.2% |
| Vacancy rate | 0.8% | 1.4% |
| Population | 2,965 | 4,800 |
Cook vs Crace: what the numbers say
The median house price is $1.1M in Cook and $1.1M in Crace, so Crace is the cheaper entry point, with Cook houses about 2% dearer.
Over the past year house prices moved -2.7% in Cook and -2.3% in Crace, so recent momentum favours Crace, while Cook went backwards.
Looking back three years, Cook houses are +17.7% and Crace houses +29.2%, so Crace has compounded faster than Cook over the longer window.
Rental vacancy is 0.8% in Cook and 1.4% in Crace, so landlords in Cook face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.
Crace is the bigger suburb, with a population of 4,800 against 2,965, larger than Cook; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Crace for a lower purchase price, Crace for recent price momentum, Cook 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