Skip to main content

Killara vs Mepunga

Property investment comparison - Killara, VIC 3691 vs Mepunga, VIC 3277

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Killara wins 1, Mepunga wins 4. 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.

MetricKillaraMepunga
Median house price$775K$770K
Median unit price$445K$375K
Gross rental yield (houses)4.20%3.61%
Gross rental yield (units)4.06%6.24%
1-year house growth+16.4%estimate-
3-year house growth--
Vacancy rate3.3%1.6%
Population1,48536

Killara vs Mepunga: what the numbers say

The median house price is $775K in Killara and $770K in Mepunga, so Mepunga is the cheaper entry point, with Killara houses about 1% dearer.

For units, Killara sits at a median of $445K against $375K in Mepunga, which makes Mepunga the more affordable unit market and Killara the pricier one.

On cash flow, Killara leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 4.20%, compared with 3.61% in Mepunga, a gap of 0.59 percentage points.

Rental vacancy is 1.6% in Mepunga and 3.3% in Killara, so landlords in Mepunga face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.

Killara is the bigger suburb, with a population of 1,485 against 36, roughly 41 times the size of Mepunga; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Killara for rental income, Mepunga for a lower purchase price, Mepunga 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