Skip to main content

Kewarra Beach vs Ripley

Property investment comparison - Kewarra Beach, QLD 4879 vs Ripley, QLD 4306

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Kewarra Beach wins 2, Ripley 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.

MetricKewarra BeachRipley
Median house price$900K$900K
Median unit price$620K-
Gross rental yield (houses)4.50%-
Gross rental yield (units)5.35%3.80%
1-year house growth+12.5%+16.6%
3-year house growth+35.9%+41.1%
Vacancy rate1.5%2.8%
Population6,1334,288

Kewarra Beach vs Ripley: what the numbers say

Houses cost about the same in both suburbs: the median house price is $900K in Kewarra Beach and $900K in Ripley.

Over the past year house prices moved +12.5% in Kewarra Beach and +16.6% in Ripley, so recent momentum favours Ripley, although both suburbs recorded growth.

Looking back three years, Kewarra Beach houses are +35.9% and Ripley houses +41.1%, so Ripley has compounded faster than Kewarra Beach over the longer window.

Rental vacancy is 1.5% in Kewarra Beach and 2.8% in Ripley, so landlords in Kewarra Beach face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.

Kewarra Beach is the bigger suburb, with a population of 6,133 against 4,288, larger than Ripley; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Ripley for recent price momentum, Kewarra Beach 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