Skip to main content

Glen Forrest vs Samson

Property investment comparison - Glen Forrest, WA 6071 vs Samson, WA 6163

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Glen Forrest wins 2, Samson 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.

MetricGlen ForrestSamson
Median house price$1.2M$1.2M
Median unit price$640K-
Gross rental yield (houses)3.15%3.25%
Gross rental yield (units)2.09%-
1-year house growth+16.3%+15.7%estimate
3-year house growth+67.8%-
Vacancy rate1.0%1.2%
Population2,7891,881

Glen Forrest vs Samson: what the numbers say

Houses cost about the same in both suburbs: the median house price is $1.2M in Glen Forrest and $1.2M in Samson.

On cash flow, Samson leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 3.25%, compared with 3.15% in Glen Forrest, a gap of 0.10 percentage points.

Over the past year house prices moved +16.3% in Glen Forrest and +15.7% in Samson (an estimate), so recent momentum favours Glen Forrest, although both suburbs recorded growth.

Rental vacancy is 1.0% in Glen Forrest and 1.2% in Samson, so landlords in Glen Forrest face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.

Glen Forrest is the bigger suburb, with a population of 2,789 against 1,881, larger than Samson; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Samson for rental income, Glen Forrest for recent price momentum, Glen Forrest 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