Copacabana vs Louth Park

Houses cost about the same in both suburbs: the median house price is $1.6M in Copacabana and $1.6M in Louth Park.

For units, Copacabana sits at a median of $1.6M against $525K in Louth Park, which makes Louth Park the more affordable unit market and Copacabana the pricier one.

On cash flow, Copacabana leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 2.71%, compared with 2.12% in Louth Park, a gap of 0.59 percentage points.

Over the past year house prices moved -6.7% in Copacabana and +10.9% in Louth Park (an estimate), so recent momentum favours Louth Park, while Copacabana went backwards.

Rental vacancy is 1.3% in Louth Park and 4.3% in Copacabana, so landlords in Louth Park face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.

Copacabana is the bigger suburb, with a population of 2,809 against 922, roughly 3.0 times the size of Louth Park; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Copacabana for rental income, Louth Park for recent price momentum, Louth Park for the tighter rental market. Which matters more depends on whether the investor is buying for cash flow, capital growth or affordability.