Fawcett vs Highton
Property investment comparison - Fawcett, VIC 3714 vs Highton, VIC 3216
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Fawcett wins 1, Highton 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 | Fawcett | Highton |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $900K | $900K |
| Median unit price | - | $535K |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 2.02% | 3.50% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | - | 4.45% |
| 1-year house growth | - | +2.3% |
| 3-year house growth | - | -2.6% |
| Vacancy rate | 1.0% | 2.1% |
| Population | 82 | 20,736 |
Fawcett vs Highton: what the numbers say
Houses cost about the same in both suburbs: the median house price is $900K in Fawcett and $900K in Highton.
On cash flow, Highton leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 3.50%, compared with 2.02% in Fawcett, a gap of 1.48 percentage points.
Rental vacancy is 1.0% in Fawcett and 2.1% in Highton, so landlords in Fawcett face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.
Highton is the bigger suburb, with a population of 20,736 against 82, roughly 253 times the size of Fawcett; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Highton for rental income, Fawcett 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