McKenzie Hill vs Timmering
Property investment comparison - McKenzie Hill, VIC 3451 vs Timmering, VIC 3561
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: McKenzie Hill wins 1, Timmering 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 | McKenzie Hill | Timmering |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $745K | $745K |
| Median unit price | $510K | $360K |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 3.58% | - |
| Gross rental yield (units) | 4.63% | 4.37% |
| 1-year house growth | -1.9%estimate | - |
| 3-year house growth | - | - |
| Vacancy rate | 3.5% | 2.8% |
| Population | 775 | 90 |
McKenzie Hill vs Timmering: what the numbers say
Houses cost about the same in both suburbs: the median house price is $745K in McKenzie Hill and $745K in Timmering.
For units, McKenzie Hill sits at a median of $510K against $360K in Timmering, which makes Timmering the more affordable unit market and McKenzie Hill the pricier one.
Rental vacancy is 2.8% in Timmering and 3.5% in McKenzie Hill, so landlords in Timmering face less competition for tenants.
McKenzie Hill is the bigger suburb, with a population of 775 against 90, roughly 9 times the size of Timmering; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Timmering 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