Earlston vs Whittington
Property investment comparison - Earlston, VIC 3669 vs Whittington, VIC 3219
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Earlston wins 3, Whittington 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 | Earlston | Whittington |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $585K | $590K |
| Median unit price | - | $430K |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 5.38% | 4.25% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | - | 5.02% |
| 1-year house growth | - | +11.3% |
| 3-year house growth | - | +18.0% |
| Vacancy rate | 0.8% | 1.2% |
| Population | 82 | 3,990 |
Earlston vs Whittington: what the numbers say
The median house price is $585K in Earlston and $590K in Whittington, so Earlston is the cheaper entry point, with Whittington houses about 1% dearer.
On cash flow, Earlston leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 5.38%, compared with 4.25% in Whittington, a gap of 1.13 percentage points.
Rental vacancy is 0.8% in Earlston and 1.2% in Whittington, so landlords in Earlston face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.
Whittington is the bigger suburb, with a population of 3,990 against 82, roughly 49 times the size of Earlston; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Earlston for rental income, Earlston for a lower purchase price, Earlston 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