Locksley vs Whittlesea
Property investment comparison - Locksley, VIC 3665 vs Whittlesea, VIC 3757
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Locksley wins 0, Whittlesea 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 | Locksley | Whittlesea |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $825K | $820K |
| Median unit price | - | $455K |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 2.81% | 3.86% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | - | 5.10% |
| 1-year house growth | - | +5.1%estimate |
| 3-year house growth | - | - |
| Vacancy rate | - | 1.3% |
| Population | 131 | 6,117 |
Locksley vs Whittlesea: what the numbers say
The median house price is $825K in Locksley and $820K in Whittlesea, so Whittlesea is the cheaper entry point, with Locksley houses about 1% dearer.
On cash flow, Whittlesea leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 3.86%, compared with 2.81% in Locksley, a gap of 1.05 percentage points.
Whittlesea is the bigger suburb, with a population of 6,117 against 131, roughly 47 times the size of Locksley; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Whittlesea for rental income, Whittlesea for a lower purchase price. 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