Garfield vs Hansonville
Property investment comparison - Garfield, VIC 3814 vs Hansonville, VIC 3675
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Garfield wins 3, Hansonville 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 | Garfield | Hansonville |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $780K | $785K |
| Median unit price | $575K | $500K |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 3.90% | 3.16% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | 5.01% | 3.60% |
| 1-year house growth | +2.5% | - |
| 3-year house growth | -6.6% | - |
| Vacancy rate | 1.1% | - |
| Population | 2,114 | 155 |
Garfield vs Hansonville: what the numbers say
The median house price is $780K in Garfield and $785K in Hansonville, so Garfield is the cheaper entry point, with Hansonville houses about 1% dearer.
For units, Garfield sits at a median of $575K against $500K in Hansonville, which makes Hansonville the more affordable unit market and Garfield the pricier one.
On cash flow, Garfield leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 3.90%, compared with 3.16% in Hansonville, a gap of 0.74 percentage points.
Garfield is the bigger suburb, with a population of 2,114 against 155, roughly 14 times the size of Hansonville; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Garfield for rental income, Garfield for a lower purchase price. 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