Giffard vs Mildura
Property investment comparison - Giffard, VIC 3851 vs Mildura, VIC 3500
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Giffard wins 0, Mildura 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 | Giffard | Mildura |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $595K | $595K |
| Median unit price | - | $400K |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 3.95% | 4.80% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | - | 5.25% |
| 1-year house growth | - | +12.8% |
| 3-year house growth | - | +28.4% |
| Vacancy rate | 26.4% | 2.4% |
| Population | 73 | 34,565 |
Giffard vs Mildura: what the numbers say
Houses cost about the same in both suburbs: the median house price is $595K in Giffard and $595K in Mildura.
On cash flow, Mildura leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 4.80%, compared with 3.95% in Giffard, a gap of 0.85 percentage points.
Rental vacancy is 2.4% in Mildura and 26.4% in Giffard, so landlords in Mildura face less competition for tenants.
Mildura is the bigger suburb, with a population of 34,565 against 73, roughly 473 times the size of Giffard; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Mildura for rental income, Mildura 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