Howqua vs Metung
Property investment comparison - Howqua, VIC 3723 vs Metung, VIC 3904
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Howqua wins 1, Metung 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 | Metung |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $630K | $630K |
| Median unit price | - | $200K |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 4.90% | 4.20% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | - | - |
| 1-year house growth | - | -0.5%estimate |
| 3-year house growth | - | - |
| Vacancy rate | 13.5% | 2.8% |
| Population | 158 | 1,899 |
Howqua vs Metung: what the numbers say
Houses cost about the same in both suburbs: the median house price is $630K in Howqua and $630K in Metung.
On cash flow, Howqua leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 4.90%, compared with 4.20% in Metung, a gap of 0.70 percentage points.
Rental vacancy is 2.8% in Metung and 13.5% in Howqua, so landlords in Metung face less competition for tenants.
Metung is the bigger suburb, with a population of 1,899 against 158, roughly 12 times the size of Howqua; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Howqua for rental income, Metung 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