Golden Square vs Llowalong
Property investment comparison - Golden Square, VIC 3555 vs Llowalong, VIC 3862
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Golden Square wins 1, Llowalong 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 | Golden Square | Llowalong |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $610K | $605K |
| Median unit price | $500K | - |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 4.51% | 4.15% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | 4.90% | - |
| 1-year house growth | +11.5% | - |
| 3-year house growth | +16.5% | - |
| Vacancy rate | 0.9% | 0.7% |
| Population | 9,220 | 42 |
Golden Square vs Llowalong: what the numbers say
The median house price is $610K in Golden Square and $605K in Llowalong, so Llowalong is the cheaper entry point, with Golden Square houses about 1% dearer.
On cash flow, Golden Square leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 4.51%, compared with 4.15% in Llowalong, a gap of 0.36 percentage points.
Rental vacancy is 0.7% in Llowalong and 0.9% in Golden Square, so landlords in Llowalong 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 42, roughly 220 times the size of Llowalong; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Golden Square for rental income, Llowalong for a lower purchase price, Llowalong 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