Skip to main content

Crows Nest vs Taromeo

Property investment comparison - Crows Nest, QLD 4355 vs Taromeo, QLD 4314

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Crows Nest wins 2, Taromeo 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.

MetricCrows NestTaromeo
Median house price$675K$675K
Median unit price$515K-
Gross rental yield (houses)3.96%4.45%
Gross rental yield (units)2.72%-
1-year house growth+16.2%+12.6%estimate
3-year house growth+55.8%-
Vacancy rate0.7%1.2%
Population2,212373

Crows Nest vs Taromeo: what the numbers say

Houses cost about the same in both suburbs: the median house price is $675K in Crows Nest and $675K in Taromeo.

On cash flow, Taromeo leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 4.45%, compared with 3.96% in Crows Nest, a gap of 0.49 percentage points.

Over the past year house prices moved +16.2% in Crows Nest and +12.6% in Taromeo (an estimate), so recent momentum favours Crows Nest, although both suburbs recorded growth.

Rental vacancy is 0.7% in Crows Nest and 1.2% in Taromeo, so landlords in Crows Nest face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.

Crows Nest is the bigger suburb, with a population of 2,212 against 373, roughly 6 times the size of Taromeo; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Taromeo for rental income, Crows Nest for recent price momentum, Crows Nest 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