Deagon vs Kents Pocket
Property investment comparison - Deagon, QLD 4017 vs Kents Pocket, QLD 4310
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Deagon wins 3, Kents Pocket 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 | Deagon | Kents Pocket |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $1.1M | $1.1M |
| Median unit price | $340K | - |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 3.24% | 2.70% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | 6.04% | - |
| 1-year house growth | - | - |
| 3-year house growth | +45.7% | - |
| Vacancy rate | 0.8% | 1.2% |
| Population | 3,773 | 21 |
Deagon vs Kents Pocket: what the numbers say
The median house price is $1.1M in Deagon and $1.1M in Kents Pocket, so Deagon is the cheaper entry point.
On cash flow, Deagon leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 3.24%, compared with 2.70% in Kents Pocket, a gap of 0.54 percentage points.
Rental vacancy is 0.8% in Deagon and 1.2% in Kents Pocket, so landlords in Deagon face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.
Deagon is the bigger suburb, with a population of 3,773 against 21, roughly 180 times the size of Kents Pocket; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Deagon for rental income, Deagon for a lower purchase price, Deagon 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