Skip to main content

Crace vs Taylor

Property investment comparison - Crace, ACT 2911 vs Taylor, ACT 2913

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Crace wins 3, Taylor wins 2. 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.

MetricCraceTaylor
Median house price$1.1M$1.1M
Median unit price$435K$570K
Gross rental yield (houses)-4.08%
Gross rental yield (units)6.62%-
1-year house growth-2.3%+2.1%
3-year house growth+29.2%+17.5%
Vacancy rate1.4%1.8%
Population4,8002,220

Crace vs Taylor: what the numbers say

The median house price is $1.1M in Crace and $1.1M in Taylor, so Taylor is the cheaper entry point, with Crace houses about 3% dearer.

For units, Crace sits at a median of $435K against $570K in Taylor, which makes Crace the more affordable unit market and Taylor the pricier one.

Over the past year house prices moved -2.3% in Crace and +2.1% in Taylor, so recent momentum favours Taylor, while Crace went backwards.

Looking back three years, Crace houses are +29.2% and Taylor houses +17.5%, so Crace has compounded faster than Taylor over the longer window.

Rental vacancy is 1.4% in Crace and 1.8% in Taylor, so landlords in Crace 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 2,220, roughly 2.2 times the size of Taylor; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Taylor for a lower purchase price, Taylor for recent price momentum, Crace 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