Cotswold Hills vs Regency Downs

Houses cost about the same in both suburbs: the median house price is $880K in Cotswold Hills and $880K in Regency Downs.

On cash flow, Regency Downs leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 4.02%, compared with 3.60% in Cotswold Hills, a gap of 0.42 percentage points.

Over the past year house prices moved +14.6% in Cotswold Hills (an estimate) and +15.4% in Regency Downs, so recent momentum favours Regency Downs, although both suburbs recorded growth.

Rental vacancy is 1.5% in Regency Downs and 8.9% in Cotswold Hills, so landlords in Regency Downs face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.

Regency Downs is the bigger suburb, with a population of 2,623 against 1,620, larger than Cotswold Hills; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

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