Hexham vs Rochester
Property investment comparison - Hexham, VIC 3273 vs Rochester, VIC 3561
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Hexham wins 1, Rochester 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 | Hexham | Rochester |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $475K | $465K |
| Median unit price | $310K | - |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 3.33% | 5.53% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | 5.09% | 5.00% |
| 1-year house growth | - | +13.5%estimate |
| 3-year house growth | - | - |
| Vacancy rate | - | 0.5% |
| Population | 130 | 3,154 |
Hexham vs Rochester: what the numbers say
The median house price is $475K in Hexham and $465K in Rochester, so Rochester is the cheaper entry point, with Hexham houses about 2% dearer.
On cash flow, Rochester leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 5.53%, compared with 3.33% in Hexham, a gap of 2.20 percentage points.
Rochester is the bigger suburb, with a population of 3,154 against 130, roughly 24 times the size of Hexham; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Rochester for rental income, Rochester 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