Skip to main content

Huntingdale vs St Helena

Property investment comparison - Huntingdale, VIC 3166 vs St Helena, VIC 3088

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Huntingdale wins 3, St Helena 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.

MetricHuntingdaleSt Helena
Median house price$1.3M$1.3M
Median unit price$620K$895K
Gross rental yield (houses)-3.15%
Gross rental yield (units)-2.99%
1-year house growth+0.8%-1.1%
3-year house growth+7.1%+9.7%
Vacancy rate0.9%1.3%
Population1,9492,890

Huntingdale vs St Helena: what the numbers say

Houses cost about the same in both suburbs: the median house price is $1.3M in Huntingdale and $1.3M in St Helena.

For units, Huntingdale sits at a median of $620K against $895K in St Helena, which makes Huntingdale the more affordable unit market and St Helena the pricier one.

Over the past year house prices moved +0.8% in Huntingdale and -1.1% in St Helena, so recent momentum favours Huntingdale, while St Helena went backwards.

Looking back three years, Huntingdale houses are +7.1% and St Helena houses +9.7%, so St Helena has compounded faster than Huntingdale over the longer window.

Rental vacancy is 0.9% in Huntingdale and 1.3% in St Helena, so landlords in Huntingdale face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.

St Helena is the bigger suburb, with a population of 2,890 against 1,949, larger than Huntingdale; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Huntingdale for recent price momentum, Huntingdale 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