Earlville vs Manunda

Houses cost about the same in both suburbs: the median house price is $745K in Earlville and $745K in Manunda.

For units, Earlville sits at a median of $370K against $355K in Manunda, which makes Manunda the more affordable unit market and Earlville the pricier one.

On cash flow, Earlville leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 5.14%, compared with 4.76% in Manunda, a gap of 0.38 percentage points.

Over the past year house prices moved +13.3% in Earlville and +21.3% in Manunda (an estimate), so recent momentum favours Manunda, although both suburbs recorded growth.

Rental vacancy is 0.4% in Earlville and 0.6% in Manunda, so landlords in Earlville face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.

Manunda is the bigger suburb, with a population of 5,191 against 4,200, larger than Earlville; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Earlville for rental income, Manunda for recent price momentum, Earlville for the tighter rental market. Which matters more depends on whether the investor is buying for cash flow, capital growth or affordability.