Docker vs Ocean Grove
Property investment comparison - Docker, VIC 3678 vs Ocean Grove, VIC 3226
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Docker wins 2, Ocean Grove 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.
| Metric | Docker | Ocean Grove |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $975K | $980K |
| Median unit price | $445K | - |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 3.93% | 3.40% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | 3.41% | 3.84% |
| 1-year house growth | - | +3.4%estimate |
| 3-year house growth | - | - |
| Vacancy rate | 2.0% | 1.9% |
| Population | 106 | 17,714 |
Docker vs Ocean Grove: what the numbers say
The median house price is $975K in Docker and $980K in Ocean Grove, so Docker is the cheaper entry point, with Ocean Grove houses about 1% dearer.
On cash flow, Docker leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 3.93%, compared with 3.40% in Ocean Grove, a gap of 0.53 percentage points.
Rental vacancy is 1.9% in Ocean Grove and 2.0% in Docker, so landlords in Ocean Grove face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.
Ocean Grove is the bigger suburb, with a population of 17,714 against 106, roughly 167 times the size of Docker; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Docker for rental income, Docker for a lower purchase price, Ocean Grove 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