Skip to main content

Currambine vs Greenwood

Property investment comparison - Currambine, WA 6028 vs Greenwood, WA 6024

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Currambine wins 3, Greenwood 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.

MetricCurrambineGreenwood
Median house price$1.1M$1.1M
Median unit price$660K-
Gross rental yield (houses)4.20%3.90%
Gross rental yield (units)-4.60%
1-year house growth+19.1%+23.4%estimate
3-year house growth+57.3%-
Vacancy rate-0.0%0.4%
Population6,8349,861

Currambine vs Greenwood: what the numbers say

The median house price is $1.1M in Currambine and $1.1M in Greenwood, so Currambine is the cheaper entry point, with Greenwood houses about 2% dearer.

On cash flow, Currambine leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 4.20%, compared with 3.90% in Greenwood, a gap of 0.30 percentage points.

Over the past year house prices moved +19.1% in Currambine and +23.4% in Greenwood (an estimate), so recent momentum favours Greenwood, although both suburbs recorded growth.

Rental vacancy is -0.0% in Currambine and 0.4% in Greenwood, so landlords in Currambine face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.

Greenwood is the bigger suburb, with a population of 9,861 against 6,834, larger than Currambine; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Currambine for rental income, Currambine for a lower purchase price, Greenwood for recent price momentum, Currambine 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