Skip to main content

Kelso vs Toormina

Property investment comparison - Kelso, NSW 2795 vs Toormina, NSW 2452

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Kelso wins 2, Toormina 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.

MetricKelsoToormina
Median house price$800K$800K
Median unit price$420K$500K
Gross rental yield (houses)4.09%4.40%
Gross rental yield (units)-4.80%
1-year house growth+6.7%+9.6%
3-year house growth+13.0%+18.9%
Vacancy rate0.7%0.8%
Population10,0396,171

Kelso vs Toormina: what the numbers say

Houses cost about the same in both suburbs: the median house price is $800K in Kelso and $800K in Toormina.

For units, Kelso sits at a median of $420K against $500K in Toormina, which makes Kelso the more affordable unit market and Toormina the pricier one.

On cash flow, Toormina leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 4.40%, compared with 4.09% in Kelso, a gap of 0.31 percentage points.

Over the past year house prices moved +6.7% in Kelso and +9.6% in Toormina, so recent momentum favours Toormina, although both suburbs recorded growth.

Looking back three years, Kelso houses are +13.0% and Toormina houses +18.9%, so Toormina has compounded faster than Kelso over the longer window.

Rental vacancy is the same in both, at 0.7%.

Kelso is the bigger suburb, with a population of 10,039 against 6,171, larger than Toormina; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Toormina for rental income, Toormina for recent price momentum. 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
Kelso vs Toormina: Property Investment Comparison (2026)