Skip to main content

Hoppers Crossing vs St Albans Park

Property investment comparison - Hoppers Crossing, VIC 3029 vs St Albans Park, VIC 3219

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Hoppers Crossing wins 1, St Albans Park wins 3. 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.

MetricHoppers CrossingSt Albans Park
Median house price$700K$700K
Median unit price$490K$490K
Gross rental yield (houses)-3.89%
Gross rental yield (units)4.35%4.20%
1-year house growth+8.4%+13.1%
3-year house growth+13.0%+19.8%
Vacancy rate2.1%0.9%
Population37,2164,942

Hoppers Crossing vs St Albans Park: what the numbers say

Houses cost about the same in both suburbs: the median house price is $700K in Hoppers Crossing and $700K in St Albans Park.

Over the past year house prices moved +8.4% in Hoppers Crossing and +13.1% in St Albans Park, so recent momentum favours St Albans Park, although both suburbs recorded growth.

Looking back three years, Hoppers Crossing houses are +13.0% and St Albans Park houses +19.8%, so St Albans Park has compounded faster than Hoppers Crossing over the longer window.

Rental vacancy is 0.9% in St Albans Park and 2.1% in Hoppers Crossing, so landlords in St Albans Park face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.

Hoppers Crossing is the bigger suburb, with a population of 37,216 against 4,942, roughly 8 times the size of St Albans Park; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: St Albans Park for recent price momentum, St Albans Park 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