Skip to main content

Garbutt vs Norville

Property investment comparison - Garbutt, QLD 4814 vs Norville, QLD 4670

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Garbutt wins 3, Norville 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.

MetricGarbuttNorville
Median house price$595K$600K
Median unit price$405K-
Gross rental yield (houses)4.90%5.16%
Gross rental yield (units)4.90%4.92%
1-year house growth+17.9%+16.0%estimate
3-year house growth+82.8%-
Vacancy rate0.1%0.9%
Population2,3092,476

Garbutt vs Norville: what the numbers say

The median house price is $595K in Garbutt and $600K in Norville, so Garbutt is the cheaper entry point, with Norville houses about 1% dearer.

On cash flow, Norville leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 5.16%, compared with 4.90% in Garbutt, a gap of 0.26 percentage points.

Over the past year house prices moved +17.9% in Garbutt and +16.0% in Norville (an estimate), so recent momentum favours Garbutt, although both suburbs recorded growth.

Rental vacancy is 0.1% in Garbutt and 0.9% in Norville, so landlords in Garbutt face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.

Norville is the bigger suburb, with a population of 2,476 against 2,309, larger than Garbutt; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Norville for rental income, Garbutt for a lower purchase price, Garbutt for recent price momentum, Garbutt 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