McCracken vs Mundoo Island
Property investment comparison - McCracken, SA 5211 vs Mundoo Island, SA 5214
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: McCracken wins 2, Mundoo Island 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 | McCracken | Mundoo Island |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $850K | $865K |
| Median unit price | $375K | - |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 3.77% | 3.32% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | 3.68% | - |
| 1-year house growth | +12.2%estimate | - |
| 3-year house growth | - | - |
| Vacancy rate | 0.9% | 0.8% |
| Population | 2,076 | 0 |
McCracken vs Mundoo Island: what the numbers say
The median house price is $850K in McCracken and $865K in Mundoo Island, so McCracken is the cheaper entry point, with Mundoo Island houses about 2% dearer.
On cash flow, McCracken leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 3.77%, compared with 3.32% in Mundoo Island, a gap of 0.45 percentage points.
Rental vacancy is 0.8% in Mundoo Island and 0.9% in McCracken, so landlords in Mundoo Island face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.
In short: McCracken for rental income, McCracken for a lower purchase price, Mundoo Island 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