Skip to main content

Kenmore vs Rosemount

Property investment comparison - Kenmore, QLD 4069 vs Rosemount, QLD 4560

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Kenmore wins 3, Rosemount wins 2. 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.

MetricKenmoreRosemount
Median house price$1.5M$1.5M
Median unit price$1.1M$845K
Gross rental yield (houses)3.19%-
Gross rental yield (units)3.83%3.55%
1-year house growth+15.1%+14.1%estimate
3-year house growth+45.3%-
Vacancy rate1.6%1.3%
Population9,6751,851

Kenmore vs Rosemount: what the numbers say

The median house price is $1.5M in Kenmore and $1.5M in Rosemount, so Kenmore is the cheaper entry point, with Rosemount houses about 2% dearer.

For units, Kenmore sits at a median of $1.1M against $845K in Rosemount, which makes Rosemount the more affordable unit market and Kenmore the pricier one.

Over the past year house prices moved +15.1% in Kenmore and +14.1% in Rosemount (an estimate), so recent momentum favours Kenmore, although both suburbs recorded growth.

Rental vacancy is 1.3% in Rosemount and 1.6% in Kenmore, so landlords in Rosemount 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 1,851, roughly 5 times the size of Rosemount; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Kenmore for a lower purchase price, Kenmore for recent price momentum, Rosemount 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