Horsham vs Rubicon
Property investment comparison - Horsham, VIC 3400 vs Rubicon, VIC 3712
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Horsham wins 2, Rubicon 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 | Horsham | Rubicon |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $475K | $470K |
| Median unit price | $400K | $195K |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 5.00% | 4.21% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | 5.10% | 4.19% |
| 1-year house growth | +18.1% | - |
| 3-year house growth | +17.5% | - |
| Vacancy rate | 0.1% | - |
| Population | 15,134 | 44 |
Horsham vs Rubicon: what the numbers say
The median house price is $475K in Horsham and $470K in Rubicon, so Rubicon is the cheaper entry point, with Horsham houses about 1% dearer.
For units, Horsham sits at a median of $400K against $195K in Rubicon, which makes Rubicon the more affordable unit market and Horsham the pricier one.
On cash flow, Horsham leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 5.00%, compared with 4.21% in Rubicon, a gap of 0.79 percentage points.
Horsham is the bigger suburb, with a population of 15,134 against 44, roughly 344 times the size of Rubicon; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Horsham for rental income, Rubicon 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