Skip to main content

Ferndale vs Rockingham

Property investment comparison - Ferndale, WA 6148 vs Rockingham, WA 6168

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Ferndale wins 3, Rockingham 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.

MetricFerndaleRockingham
Median house price$860K$855K
Median unit price$680K-
Gross rental yield (houses)4.30%3.80%
Gross rental yield (units)5.20%-
1-year house growth+18.6%estimate+16.3%
3-year house growth-+74.1%
Vacancy rate1.0%1.1%
Population4,45715,312

Ferndale vs Rockingham: what the numbers say

The median house price is $860K in Ferndale and $855K in Rockingham, so Rockingham is the cheaper entry point, with Ferndale houses about 1% dearer.

On cash flow, Ferndale leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 4.30%, compared with 3.80% in Rockingham, a gap of 0.50 percentage points.

Over the past year house prices moved +18.6% in Ferndale (an estimate) and +16.3% in Rockingham, so recent momentum favours Ferndale, although both suburbs recorded growth.

Rental vacancy is 1.0% in Ferndale and 1.1% in Rockingham, so landlords in Ferndale face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.

Rockingham is the bigger suburb, with a population of 15,312 against 4,457, roughly 3.4 times the size of Ferndale; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Ferndale for rental income, Rockingham for a lower purchase price, Ferndale for recent price momentum, Ferndale 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