Kalkie vs Mount Peter
Property investment comparison - Kalkie, QLD 4670 vs Mount Peter, QLD 4869
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Kalkie wins 2, Mount Peter 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 | Kalkie | Mount Peter |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $800K | $800K |
| Median unit price | - | $605K |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 4.30% | - |
| Gross rental yield (units) | 4.90% | 4.72% |
| 1-year house growth | +13.2%estimate | +17.8%estimate |
| 3-year house growth | - | - |
| Vacancy rate | 0.9% | 1.9% |
| Population | 2,968 | 689 |
Kalkie vs Mount Peter: what the numbers say
Houses cost about the same in both suburbs: the median house price is $800K in Kalkie and $800K in Mount Peter.
Over the past year house prices moved +13.2% in Kalkie (an estimate) and +17.8% in Mount Peter (an estimate), so recent momentum favours Mount Peter, although both suburbs recorded growth.
Rental vacancy is 0.9% in Kalkie and 1.9% in Mount Peter, so landlords in Kalkie face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.
Kalkie is the bigger suburb, with a population of 2,968 against 689, roughly 4.3 times the size of Mount Peter; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Mount Peter for recent price momentum, Kalkie 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