Kedron vs Pelican Waters

The median house price is $1.6M in Kedron and $1.6M in Pelican Waters, so Pelican Waters is the cheaper entry point, with Kedron houses about 1% dearer.

For units, Kedron sits at a median of $820K against $1.0M in Pelican Waters, which makes Kedron the more affordable unit market and Pelican Waters the pricier one.

On cash flow, Pelican Waters leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 3.30%, compared with 2.47% in Kedron, a gap of 0.83 percentage points.

Over the past year house prices moved +13.1% in Kedron and +12.9% in Pelican Waters, so recent momentum favours Kedron, although both suburbs recorded growth.

Looking back three years, Kedron houses are +54.1% and Pelican Waters houses +26.0%, so Kedron has compounded faster than Pelican Waters over the longer window.

Rental vacancy is 1.0% in Kedron and 1.5% in Pelican Waters, so landlords in Kedron face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.

Kedron is the bigger suburb, with a population of 9,907 against 7,393, larger than Pelican Waters; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Pelican Waters for rental income, Pelican Waters for a lower purchase price, Kedron for recent price momentum, Kedron for the tighter rental market. Which matters more depends on whether the investor is buying for cash flow, capital growth or affordability.