Skip to main content

Cotton Tree vs Redland Bay

Property investment comparison - Cotton Tree, QLD 4558 vs Redland Bay, QLD 4165

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Cotton Tree wins 3, Redland Bay 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.

MetricCotton TreeRedland Bay
Median house price$1.2M$1.2M
Median unit price$975K$880K
Gross rental yield (houses)3.59%3.39%
Gross rental yield (units)4.16%3.84%
1-year house growth-+16.6%estimate
3-year house growth--
Vacancy rate0.8%1.8%
Population25,79717,056

Cotton Tree vs Redland Bay: what the numbers say

Houses cost about the same in both suburbs: the median house price is $1.2M in Cotton Tree and $1.2M in Redland Bay.

For units, Cotton Tree sits at a median of $975K against $880K in Redland Bay, which makes Redland Bay the more affordable unit market and Cotton Tree the pricier one.

On cash flow, Cotton Tree leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 3.59%, compared with 3.39% in Redland Bay, a gap of 0.20 percentage points.

Rental vacancy is 0.8% in Cotton Tree and 1.8% in Redland Bay, so landlords in Cotton Tree face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.

Cotton Tree is the bigger suburb, with a population of 25,797 against 17,056, larger than Redland Bay; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Cotton Tree for rental income, Cotton Tree 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