Howqua vs Kilmore
Property investment comparison - Howqua, VIC 3723 vs Kilmore, VIC 3764
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Howqua wins 1, Kilmore wins 1. 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 | Howqua | Kilmore |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $630K | $630K |
| Median unit price | - | $445K |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 4.90% | 4.15% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | - | 4.80% |
| 1-year house growth | - | +2.6% |
| 3-year house growth | - | +3.4% |
| Vacancy rate | 13.5% | 1.4% |
| Population | 158 | 9,207 |
Howqua vs Kilmore: what the numbers say
Houses cost about the same in both suburbs: the median house price is $630K in Howqua and $630K in Kilmore.
On cash flow, Howqua leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 4.90%, compared with 4.15% in Kilmore, a gap of 0.75 percentage points.
Rental vacancy is 1.4% in Kilmore and 13.5% in Howqua, so landlords in Kilmore face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.
Kilmore is the bigger suburb, with a population of 9,207 against 158, roughly 58 times the size of Howqua; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Howqua for rental income, Kilmore 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