Skip to main content

Fyansford vs Kalorama

Property investment comparison - Fyansford, VIC 3218 vs Kalorama, VIC 3766

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Fyansford wins 2, Kalorama 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.

MetricFyansfordKalorama
Median house price$915K$915K
Median unit price$665K$1.3M
Gross rental yield (houses)3.70%5.13%
Gross rental yield (units)4.19%-
1-year house growth-4.7%estimate-2.4%estimate
3-year house growth--
Vacancy rate2.6%2.9%
Population1,2061,277

Fyansford vs Kalorama: what the numbers say

Houses cost about the same in both suburbs: the median house price is $915K in Fyansford and $915K in Kalorama.

For units, Fyansford sits at a median of $665K against $1.3M in Kalorama, which makes Fyansford the more affordable unit market and Kalorama the pricier one.

On cash flow, Kalorama leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 5.13%, compared with 3.70% in Fyansford, a gap of 1.43 percentage points.

Over the past year house prices moved -4.7% in Fyansford (an estimate) and -2.4% in Kalorama (an estimate), so recent momentum favours Kalorama, while Fyansford went backwards.

Rental vacancy is 2.6% in Fyansford and 2.9% in Kalorama, so landlords in Fyansford face less competition for tenants.

Kalorama is the bigger suburb, with a population of 1,277 against 1,206, larger than Fyansford; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Kalorama for rental income, Kalorama for recent price momentum, Fyansford 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