Skip to main content

Fairfield vs Woolamai

Property investment comparison - Fairfield, VIC 3078 vs Woolamai, VIC 3995

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Fairfield wins 4, Woolamai 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.

MetricFairfieldWoolamai
Median house price$1.8M$1.8M
Median unit price-$555K
Gross rental yield (houses)2.59%1.55%
Gross rental yield (units)4.42%4.15%
1-year house growth+6.1%+2.9%
3-year house growth+13.2%-
Vacancy rate1.0%6.2%
Population6,535245

Fairfield vs Woolamai: what the numbers say

The median house price is $1.8M in Fairfield and $1.8M in Woolamai, so Woolamai is the cheaper entry point, with Fairfield houses about 1% dearer.

On cash flow, Fairfield leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 2.59%, compared with 1.55% in Woolamai, a gap of 1.04 percentage points.

Over the past year house prices moved +6.1% in Fairfield and +2.9% in Woolamai, so recent momentum favours Fairfield, although both suburbs recorded growth.

Rental vacancy is 1.0% in Fairfield and 6.2% in Woolamai, 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 245, roughly 27 times the size of Woolamai; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Fairfield for rental income, Woolamai for a lower purchase price, Fairfield for recent price momentum, 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

Compare any 2-4 Australian suburbs

Build your own multi-suburb comparison with the full interactive tool.

Open interactive comparison