Fairfield vs Ravenhall
Property investment comparison - Fairfield, VIC 3078 vs Ravenhall, VIC 3023
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Fairfield wins 4, Ravenhall 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 | Fairfield | Ravenhall |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $1.8M | $1.8M |
| Median unit price | - | - |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 2.59% | 1.66% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | 4.42% | 3.22% |
| 1-year house growth | +6.1% | - |
| 3-year house growth | +13.2% | - |
| Vacancy rate | 1.0% | 1.1% |
| Population | 6,535 | 2,295 |
Fairfield vs Ravenhall: what the numbers say
The median house price is $1.8M in Fairfield and $1.8M in Ravenhall, so Fairfield is the cheaper entry point, with Ravenhall houses about 1% dearer.
On cash flow, Fairfield leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 2.59%, compared with 1.66% in Ravenhall, a gap of 0.93 percentage points.
Rental vacancy is 1.0% in Fairfield and 1.1% in Ravenhall, so landlords in Fairfield face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.
Fairfield is the bigger suburb, with a population of 6,535 against 2,295, roughly 2.8 times the size of Ravenhall; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Fairfield for rental income, Fairfield for a lower purchase price, Fairfield 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