Eastwood vs Plumpton
Property investment comparison - Eastwood, VIC 3875 vs Plumpton, VIC 3335
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Eastwood wins 3, Plumpton 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.
| Metric | Eastwood | Plumpton |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $635K | $635K |
| Median unit price | $440K | $605K |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 4.20% | 3.14% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | 4.39% | 4.55% |
| 1-year house growth | +4.3% | - |
| 3-year house growth | +3.5% | - |
| Vacancy rate | 2.2% | 9.2% |
| Population | 2,855 | 79 |
Eastwood vs Plumpton: what the numbers say
Houses cost about the same in both suburbs: the median house price is $635K in Eastwood and $635K in Plumpton.
For units, Eastwood sits at a median of $440K against $605K in Plumpton, which makes Eastwood the more affordable unit market and Plumpton the pricier one.
On cash flow, Eastwood leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 4.20%, compared with 3.14% in Plumpton, a gap of 1.06 percentage points.
Rental vacancy is 2.2% in Eastwood and 9.2% in Plumpton, so landlords in Eastwood face less competition for tenants.
Eastwood is the bigger suburb, with a population of 2,855 against 79, roughly 36 times the size of Plumpton; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Eastwood for rental income, Eastwood 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