Skip to main content

Kepnock vs Mundingburra

Property investment comparison - Kepnock, QLD 4670 vs Mundingburra, QLD 4812

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Kepnock wins 1, Mundingburra 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.

MetricKepnockMundingburra
Median house price$675K$675K
Median unit price-$400K
Gross rental yield (houses)4.67%4.40%
Gross rental yield (units)-5.45%
1-year house growth+16.6%+20.0%estimate
3-year house growth+60.4%-
Vacancy rate2.0%0.8%
Population4,5013,594

Kepnock vs Mundingburra: what the numbers say

Houses cost about the same in both suburbs: the median house price is $675K in Kepnock and $675K in Mundingburra.

On cash flow, Kepnock leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 4.67%, compared with 4.40% in Mundingburra, a gap of 0.27 percentage points.

Over the past year house prices moved +16.6% in Kepnock and +20.0% in Mundingburra (an estimate), so recent momentum favours Mundingburra, although both suburbs recorded growth.

Rental vacancy is 0.8% in Mundingburra and 2.0% in Kepnock, so landlords in Mundingburra face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.

Kepnock is the bigger suburb, with a population of 4,501 against 3,594, larger than Mundingburra; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Kepnock for rental income, Mundingburra for recent price momentum, Mundingburra 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