Greta vs Leopold
Property investment comparison - Greta, VIC 3675 vs Leopold, VIC 3224
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Greta wins 0, Leopold 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.
| Metric | Greta | Leopold |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $720K | $720K |
| Median unit price | - | $520K |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 3.22% | 4.00% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | - | 4.72% |
| 1-year house growth | - | +8.7% |
| 3-year house growth | - | +4.0% |
| Vacancy rate | - | 1.2% |
| Population | 86 | 13,272 |
Greta vs Leopold: what the numbers say
Houses cost about the same in both suburbs: the median house price is $720K in Greta and $720K in Leopold.
On cash flow, Leopold leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 4.00%, compared with 3.22% in Greta, a gap of 0.78 percentage points.
Leopold is the bigger suburb, with a population of 13,272 against 86, roughly 154 times the size of Greta; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Leopold for rental income. 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