Skip to main content

Kenmore vs Mount Lindesay

Property investment comparison - Kenmore, QLD 4069 vs Mount Lindesay, QLD 4287

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Kenmore wins 3, Mount Lindesay wins 0. 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.

MetricKenmoreMount Lindesay
Median house price$1.5M$1.5M
Median unit price$1.1M-
Gross rental yield (houses)3.19%1.96%
Gross rental yield (units)3.83%-
1-year house growth+15.1%-
3-year house growth+45.3%-
Vacancy rate1.6%2.6%
Population9,67514

Kenmore vs Mount Lindesay: what the numbers say

The median house price is $1.5M in Kenmore and $1.5M in Mount Lindesay, so Kenmore is the cheaper entry point, with Mount Lindesay houses about 1% dearer.

On cash flow, Kenmore leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 3.19%, compared with 1.96% in Mount Lindesay, a gap of 1.23 percentage points.

Rental vacancy is 1.6% in Kenmore and 2.6% in Mount Lindesay, so landlords in Kenmore face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.

Kenmore is the bigger suburb, with a population of 9,675 against 14, roughly 691 times the size of Mount Lindesay; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Kenmore for rental income, Kenmore for a lower purchase price, Kenmore 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