Ludlow vs Roleystone
Property investment comparison - Ludlow, WA 6280 vs Roleystone, WA 6111
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Ludlow wins 3, Roleystone wins 1. 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 | Ludlow | Roleystone |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $1.2M | $1.2M |
| Median unit price | $505K | $490K |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 3.56% | 3.41% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | 7.68% | 7.34% |
| 1-year house growth | - | +22.2%estimate |
| 3-year house growth | - | - |
| Vacancy rate | 0.7% | 1.3% |
| Population | 132 | 6,848 |
Ludlow vs Roleystone: what the numbers say
Houses cost about the same in both suburbs: the median house price is $1.2M in Ludlow and $1.2M in Roleystone.
For units, Ludlow sits at a median of $505K against $490K in Roleystone, which makes Roleystone the more affordable unit market and Ludlow the pricier one.
On cash flow, Ludlow leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 3.56%, compared with 3.41% in Roleystone, a gap of 0.15 percentage points.
Rental vacancy is 0.7% in Ludlow and 1.3% in Roleystone, so landlords in Ludlow face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.
Roleystone is the bigger suburb, with a population of 6,848 against 132, roughly 52 times the size of Ludlow; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Ludlow for rental income, Ludlow 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