Skip to main content

Karnup vs Westminster

Property investment comparison - Karnup, WA 6176 vs Westminster, WA 6061

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Karnup wins 1, Westminster wins 4. 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.

MetricKarnupWestminster
Median house price$810K$810K
Median unit price$825K$690K
Gross rental yield (houses)-4.55%
Gross rental yield (units)1.94%4.03%
1-year house growth+23.7%+20.9%
3-year house growth+72.1%+90.5%
Vacancy rate5.2%0.8%
Population2,0967,042

Karnup vs Westminster: what the numbers say

Houses cost about the same in both suburbs: the median house price is $810K in Karnup and $810K in Westminster.

For units, Karnup sits at a median of $825K against $690K in Westminster, which makes Westminster the more affordable unit market and Karnup the pricier one.

Over the past year house prices moved +23.7% in Karnup and +20.9% in Westminster, so recent momentum favours Karnup, although both suburbs recorded growth.

Looking back three years, Karnup houses are +72.1% and Westminster houses +90.5%, so Westminster has compounded faster than Karnup over the longer window.

Rental vacancy is 0.8% in Westminster and 5.2% in Karnup, so landlords in Westminster face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.

Westminster is the bigger suburb, with a population of 7,042 against 2,096, roughly 3.4 times the size of Karnup; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Karnup for recent price momentum, Westminster 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