Fyansford vs Werona
Property investment comparison - Fyansford, VIC 3218 vs Werona, VIC 3364
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Fyansford wins 1, Werona 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.
| Metric | Fyansford | Werona |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $915K | $910K |
| Median unit price | $665K | - |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 3.70% | 3.35% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | 4.19% | - |
| 1-year house growth | -4.7%estimate | - |
| 3-year house growth | - | - |
| Vacancy rate | 2.6% | 1.6% |
| Population | 1,206 | 43 |
Fyansford vs Werona: what the numbers say
The median house price is $915K in Fyansford and $910K in Werona, so Werona is the cheaper entry point, with Fyansford houses about 1% dearer.
On cash flow, Fyansford leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 3.70%, compared with 3.35% in Werona, a gap of 0.35 percentage points.
Rental vacancy is 1.6% in Werona and 2.6% in Fyansford, so landlords in Werona face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.
Fyansford is the bigger suburb, with a population of 1,206 against 43, roughly 28 times the size of Werona; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Fyansford for rental income, Werona for a lower purchase price, Werona 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