Cowaramup vs Ludlow
Property investment comparison - Cowaramup, WA 6284 vs Ludlow, WA 6280
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Cowaramup wins 0, Ludlow 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 | Cowaramup | Ludlow |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $1.2M | $1.2M |
| Median unit price | - | $505K |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 3.40% | 3.56% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | 2.20% | 7.68% |
| 1-year house growth | +18.6% | - |
| 3-year house growth | +43.6% | - |
| Vacancy rate | 2.2% | 0.7% |
| Population | 2,482 | 132 |
Cowaramup vs Ludlow: what the numbers say
The median house price is $1.2M in Cowaramup and $1.2M in Ludlow, so Ludlow is the cheaper entry point.
On cash flow, Ludlow leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 3.56%, compared with 3.40% in Cowaramup, a gap of 0.16 percentage points.
Rental vacancy is 0.7% in Ludlow and 2.2% in Cowaramup, so landlords in Ludlow face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.
Cowaramup is the bigger suburb, with a population of 2,482 against 132, roughly 19 times the size of Ludlow; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Ludlow for rental income, Ludlow for a lower purchase price, Ludlow 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