Hamilton vs Lurnea

Houses cost about the same in both suburbs: the median house price is $1.2M in Hamilton and $1.2M in Lurnea.

For units, Hamilton sits at a median of $770K against $750K in Lurnea, which makes Lurnea the more affordable unit market and Hamilton the pricier one.

On cash flow, Hamilton leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 3.50%, compared with 3.02% in Lurnea, a gap of 0.48 percentage points.

Over the past year house prices moved +7.2% in Hamilton and +10.6% in Lurnea (an estimate), so recent momentum favours Lurnea, although both suburbs recorded growth.

Rental vacancy is 0.8% in Lurnea and 1.4% in Hamilton, so landlords in Lurnea face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.

Lurnea is the bigger suburb, with a population of 10,057 against 4,614, roughly 2.2 times the size of Hamilton; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Hamilton for rental income, Lurnea for recent price momentum, Lurnea for the tighter rental market. Which matters more depends on whether the investor is buying for cash flow, capital growth or affordability.