Curlewis vs Greta
Property investment comparison - Curlewis, VIC 3222 vs Greta, VIC 3675
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Curlewis wins 1, Greta wins 0. 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 | Curlewis | Greta |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $720K | $720K |
| Median unit price | $730K | - |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 4.03% | 3.22% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | 3.09% | - |
| 1-year house growth | +8.0% | - |
| 3-year house growth | +6.0% | - |
| Vacancy rate | 1.6% | - |
| Population | 4,175 | 86 |
Curlewis vs Greta: what the numbers say
Houses cost about the same in both suburbs: the median house price is $720K in Curlewis and $720K in Greta.
On cash flow, Curlewis leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 4.03%, compared with 3.22% in Greta, a gap of 0.81 percentage points.
Curlewis is the bigger suburb, with a population of 4,175 against 86, roughly 49 times the size of Greta; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Curlewis for rental income. 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