Skip to main content

Gordonvale vs Mount Low

Property investment comparison - Gordonvale, QLD 4865 vs Mount Low, QLD 4818

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Gordonvale wins 2, Mount Low 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.

MetricGordonvaleMount Low
Median house price$725K$725K
Median unit price--
Gross rental yield (houses)4.90%4.56%
Gross rental yield (units)4.08%4.54%
1-year house growth+16.5%+16.5%
3-year house growth+45.8%+64.4%
Vacancy rate1.0%1.3%
Population6,9445,488

Gordonvale vs Mount Low: what the numbers say

Houses cost about the same in both suburbs: the median house price is $725K in Gordonvale and $725K in Mount Low.

On cash flow, Gordonvale leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 4.90%, compared with 4.56% in Mount Low, a gap of 0.34 percentage points.

Over the past year house prices moved +16.5% in both suburbs.

Looking back three years, Gordonvale houses are +45.8% and Mount Low houses +64.4%, so Mount Low has compounded faster than Gordonvale over the longer window.

Rental vacancy is 1.0% in Gordonvale and 1.3% in Mount Low, so landlords in Gordonvale face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.

Gordonvale is the bigger suburb, with a population of 6,944 against 5,488, larger than Mount Low; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Gordonvale for rental income, Gordonvale 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