Hacketts Gully vs Mount Hawthorn
Property investment comparison - Hacketts Gully, WA 6076 vs Mount Hawthorn, WA 6016
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Hacketts Gully wins 1, Mount Hawthorn 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 | Hacketts Gully | Mount Hawthorn |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $1.8M | $1.8M |
| Median unit price | - | $795K |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 3.34% | 2.90% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | - | - |
| 1-year house growth | - | +15.1%estimate |
| 3-year house growth | - | - |
| Vacancy rate | 0.4% | 0.3% |
| Population | 55 | 8,183 |
Hacketts Gully vs Mount Hawthorn: what the numbers say
The median house price is $1.8M in Hacketts Gully and $1.8M in Mount Hawthorn, so Mount Hawthorn is the cheaper entry point, with Hacketts Gully houses about 1% dearer.
On cash flow, Hacketts Gully leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 3.34%, compared with 2.90% in Mount Hawthorn, a gap of 0.44 percentage points.
Rental vacancy is the same in both, at 0.4%.
Mount Hawthorn is the bigger suburb, with a population of 8,183 against 55, roughly 149 times the size of Hacketts Gully; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Hacketts Gully for rental income, Mount Hawthorn for a lower purchase price. 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