Skip to main content

Kinross vs Stoneville

Property investment comparison - Kinross, WA 6028 vs Stoneville, WA 6081

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Kinross wins 3, Stoneville 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.

MetricKinrossStoneville
Median house price$1.0M$1.0M
Median unit price-$560K
Gross rental yield (houses)4.08%2.93%
Gross rental yield (units)4.60%2.52%
1-year house growth+22.9%+15.8%estimate
3-year house growth+60.0%-
Vacancy rate1.4%1.4%
Population6,9882,489

Kinross vs Stoneville: what the numbers say

The median house price is $1.0M in Kinross and $1.0M in Stoneville, so Stoneville is the cheaper entry point, with Kinross houses about 1% dearer.

On cash flow, Kinross leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 4.08%, compared with 2.93% in Stoneville, a gap of 1.15 percentage points.

Over the past year house prices moved +22.9% in Kinross and +15.8% in Stoneville (an estimate), so recent momentum favours Kinross, although both suburbs recorded growth.

Rental vacancy is the same in both, at 1.4%.

Kinross is the bigger suburb, with a population of 6,988 against 2,489, roughly 2.8 times the size of Stoneville; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Kinross for rental income, Stoneville for a lower purchase price, Kinross for recent price momentum. 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