Mascot vs Miranda

The median house price is $2.0M in Mascot and $2.0M in Miranda, so Mascot is the cheaper entry point, with Miranda houses about 1% dearer.

For units, Mascot sits at a median of $900K against $840K in Miranda, which makes Miranda the more affordable unit market and Mascot the pricier one.

On cash flow, Mascot leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 2.95%, compared with 2.56% in Miranda, a gap of 0.39 percentage points.

Over the past year house prices moved +5.0% in Mascot and +4.4% in Miranda, so recent momentum favours Mascot, although both suburbs recorded growth.

Looking back three years, Mascot houses are +2.2% and Miranda houses +19.2%, so Miranda has compounded faster than Mascot over the longer window.

Rental vacancy is 0.9% in Miranda and 2.4% in Mascot, so landlords in Miranda face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.

Mascot is the bigger suburb, with a population of 21,591 against 17,942, larger than Miranda; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Mascot for rental income, Mascot for a lower purchase price, Mascot for recent price momentum, Miranda for the tighter rental market. Which matters more depends on whether the investor is buying for cash flow, capital growth or affordability.