Gnotuk vs Golden Square
Property investment comparison - Gnotuk, VIC 3260 vs Golden Square, VIC 3555
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Gnotuk wins 1, Golden Square 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 | Gnotuk | Golden Square |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $610K | $610K |
| Median unit price | $590K | $500K |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | - | 4.51% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | 3.81% | 4.90% |
| 1-year house growth | - | +11.5% |
| 3-year house growth | - | +16.5% |
| Vacancy rate | 0.6% | 0.9% |
| Population | 120 | 9,220 |
Gnotuk vs Golden Square: what the numbers say
Houses cost about the same in both suburbs: the median house price is $610K in Gnotuk and $610K in Golden Square.
For units, Gnotuk sits at a median of $590K against $500K in Golden Square, which makes Golden Square the more affordable unit market and Gnotuk the pricier one.
Rental vacancy is 0.6% in Gnotuk and 0.9% in Golden Square, so landlords in Gnotuk face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.
Golden Square is the bigger suburb, with a population of 9,220 against 120, roughly 77 times the size of Gnotuk; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Gnotuk 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