Skip to main content

Long Gully vs Norlane

Property investment comparison - Long Gully, VIC 3550 vs Norlane, VIC 3214

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Long Gully wins 2, Norlane wins 3. 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.

MetricLong GullyNorlane
Median house price$550K$550K
Median unit price$480K$440K
Gross rental yield (houses)-3.95%
Gross rental yield (units)4.70%4.91%
1-year house growth+13.2%+19.1%
3-year house growth+36.2%+15.4%
Vacancy rate1.1%2.1%
Population3,4208,682

Long Gully vs Norlane: what the numbers say

Houses cost about the same in both suburbs: the median house price is $550K in Long Gully and $550K in Norlane.

For units, Long Gully sits at a median of $480K against $440K in Norlane, which makes Norlane the more affordable unit market and Long Gully the pricier one.

Over the past year house prices moved +13.2% in Long Gully and +19.1% in Norlane, so recent momentum favours Norlane, although both suburbs recorded growth.

Looking back three years, Long Gully houses are +36.2% and Norlane houses +15.4%, so Long Gully has compounded faster than Norlane over the longer window.

Rental vacancy is 1.1% in Long Gully and 2.1% in Norlane, so landlords in Long Gully face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.

Norlane is the bigger suburb, with a population of 8,682 against 3,420, roughly 2.5 times the size of Long Gully; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Norlane for recent price momentum, Long Gully 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