Kybybolite vs Millicent
Property investment comparison - Kybybolite, SA 5262 vs Millicent, SA 5280
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Kybybolite wins 1, Millicent 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.
| Metric | Kybybolite | Millicent |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $375K | $415K |
| Median unit price | - | - |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 4.01% | 5.26% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | - | 2.36% |
| 1-year house growth | - | +16.5% |
| 3-year house growth | - | +19.1% |
| Vacancy rate | 4.3% | 0.3% |
| Population | 102 | 5,110 |
Kybybolite vs Millicent: what the numbers say
The median house price is $375K in Kybybolite and $415K in Millicent, so Kybybolite is the cheaper entry point, with Millicent houses about 11% dearer.
On cash flow, Millicent leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 5.26%, compared with 4.01% in Kybybolite, a gap of 1.25 percentage points.
Rental vacancy is 0.3% in Millicent and 4.3% in Kybybolite, so landlords in Millicent face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.
Millicent is the bigger suburb, with a population of 5,110 against 102, roughly 50 times the size of Kybybolite; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Millicent for rental income, Kybybolite for a lower purchase price, Millicent 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