Kialla vs Mount Duneed
Property investment comparison - Kialla, VIC 3631 vs Mount Duneed, VIC 3216
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Kialla wins 2, Mount Duneed wins 1. 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.
| Metric | Kialla | Mount Duneed |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $705K | $705K |
| Median unit price | - | $520K |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 4.39% | 3.98% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | 5.36% | 4.40% |
| 1-year house growth | +4.2% | - |
| 3-year house growth | +4.2% | - |
| Vacancy rate | 1.6% | 1.1% |
| Population | 8,667 | 6,182 |
Kialla vs Mount Duneed: what the numbers say
Houses cost about the same in both suburbs: the median house price is $705K in Kialla and $705K in Mount Duneed.
On cash flow, Kialla leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 4.39%, compared with 3.98% in Mount Duneed, a gap of 0.41 percentage points.
Rental vacancy is 1.1% in Mount Duneed and 1.6% in Kialla, so landlords in Mount Duneed face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.
Kialla is the bigger suburb, with a population of 8,667 against 6,182, larger than Mount Duneed; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Kialla for rental income, Mount Duneed for the tighter rental market. Which matters more depends on whether the investor is buying for cash flow, capital growth or affordability.
Keep exploring
- National investment guide - top suburbs across every metric
- Take the suburb finder quiz - 5 questions to match your goals
- How our investment score works
- Property investment glossary - every term defined
Compare any 2-4 Australian suburbs
Build your own multi-suburb comparison with the full interactive tool.
Open interactive comparison