Skip to main content

Ipswich vs Kawungan

Property investment comparison - Ipswich, QLD 4305 vs Kawungan, QLD 4655

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Ipswich wins 1, Kawungan wins 3. 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.

MetricIpswichKawungan
Median house price$830K$830K
Median unit price$660K-
Gross rental yield (houses)3.63%4.20%
Gross rental yield (units)3.17%4.11%
1-year house growth+13.4%estimate+16.6%
3-year house growth-+35.2%
Vacancy rate0.2%2.4%
Population2,4685,460

Ipswich vs Kawungan: what the numbers say

Houses cost about the same in both suburbs: the median house price is $830K in Ipswich and $830K in Kawungan.

On cash flow, Kawungan leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 4.20%, compared with 3.63% in Ipswich, a gap of 0.57 percentage points.

Over the past year house prices moved +13.4% in Ipswich (an estimate) and +16.6% in Kawungan, so recent momentum favours Kawungan, although both suburbs recorded growth.

Rental vacancy is 0.2% in Ipswich and 2.4% in Kawungan, so landlords in Ipswich face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.

Kawungan is the bigger suburb, with a population of 5,460 against 2,468, roughly 2.2 times the size of Ipswich; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Kawungan for rental income, Kawungan for recent price momentum, Ipswich 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