Skip to main content

Habana vs Pacific Paradise

Property investment comparison - Habana, QLD 4740 vs Pacific Paradise, QLD 4564

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Habana wins 1, Pacific Paradise wins 4. 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.

MetricHabanaPacific Paradise
Median house price$1.1M$1.1M
Median unit price$505K-
Gross rental yield (houses)2.64%3.87%
Gross rental yield (units)5.38%4.44%
1-year house growth+6.2%estimate+14.8%estimate
3-year house growth--
Vacancy rate2.6%0.5%
Population1,0222,675

Habana vs Pacific Paradise: what the numbers say

The median house price is $1.1M in Habana and $1.1M in Pacific Paradise, so Pacific Paradise is the cheaper entry point.

On cash flow, Pacific Paradise leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 3.87%, compared with 2.64% in Habana, a gap of 1.23 percentage points.

Over the past year house prices moved +6.2% in Habana (an estimate) and +14.8% in Pacific Paradise (an estimate), so recent momentum favours Pacific Paradise, although both suburbs recorded growth.

Rental vacancy is 0.5% in Pacific Paradise and 2.6% in Habana, so landlords in Pacific Paradise face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.

Pacific Paradise is the bigger suburb, with a population of 2,675 against 1,022, roughly 2.6 times the size of Habana; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Pacific Paradise for rental income, Pacific Paradise for a lower purchase price, Pacific Paradise for recent price momentum, Pacific Paradise 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