Exford vs Fawkner
Property investment comparison - Exford, VIC 3338 vs Fawkner, VIC 3060
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Exford wins 0, Fawkner 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 | Exford | Fawkner |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $850K | $850K |
| Median unit price | - | $650K |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 2.80% | 3.60% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | - | - |
| 1-year house growth | - | +6.8%estimate |
| 3-year house growth | - | - |
| Vacancy rate | 5.0% | 1.0% |
| Population | 133 | 14,274 |
Exford vs Fawkner: what the numbers say
Houses cost about the same in both suburbs: the median house price is $850K in Exford and $850K in Fawkner.
On cash flow, Fawkner leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 3.60%, compared with 2.80% in Exford, a gap of 0.80 percentage points.
Rental vacancy is 1.0% in Fawkner and 5.0% in Exford, so landlords in Fawkner face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.
Fawkner is the bigger suburb, with a population of 14,274 against 133, roughly 107 times the size of Exford; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Fawkner for rental income, Fawkner 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