Henley Brook vs Redcliffe
Property investment comparison - Henley Brook, WA 6055 vs Redcliffe, WA 6104
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Henley Brook wins 0, Redcliffe 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 | Henley Brook | Redcliffe |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $930K | $930K |
| Median unit price | - | $610K |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | - | 4.28% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | 3.61% | 5.65% |
| 1-year house growth | - | +19.3% |
| 3-year house growth | - | +73.5% |
| Vacancy rate | 3.6% | 0.4% |
| Population | 2,500 | 5,030 |
Henley Brook vs Redcliffe: what the numbers say
Houses cost about the same in both suburbs: the median house price is $930K in Henley Brook and $930K in Redcliffe.
Rental vacancy is 0.4% in Redcliffe and 3.6% in Henley Brook, so landlords in Redcliffe face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.
Redcliffe is the bigger suburb, with a population of 5,030 against 2,500, roughly 2.0 times the size of Henley Brook; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Redcliffe for the tighter rental market. 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