Skip to main content

Image vs Mount Lofty

Property investment comparison - Image, QLD 4560 vs Mount Lofty, QLD 4350

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Image wins 3, Mount Lofty 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.

MetricImageMount Lofty
Median house price$1.1M$1.1M
Median unit price$735K$640K
Gross rental yield (houses)3.94%3.00%
Gross rental yield (units)4.31%3.59%
1-year house growth-+14.9%
3-year house growth-+51.3%
Vacancy rate0.3%1.1%
Population17,3923,825

Image vs Mount Lofty: what the numbers say

The median house price is $1.1M in Image and $1.1M in Mount Lofty, so Mount Lofty is the cheaper entry point, with Image houses about 1% dearer.

For units, Image sits at a median of $735K against $640K in Mount Lofty, which makes Mount Lofty the more affordable unit market and Image the pricier one.

On cash flow, Image leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 3.94%, compared with 3.00% in Mount Lofty, a gap of 0.94 percentage points.

Rental vacancy is 0.3% in Image and 1.1% in Mount Lofty, so landlords in Image face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.

Image is the bigger suburb, with a population of 17,392 against 3,825, roughly 4.5 times the size of Mount Lofty; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Image for rental income, Mount Lofty for a lower purchase price, Image 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