Skip to main content

Milabena vs New Norfolk

Property investment comparison - Milabena, TAS 7325 vs New Norfolk, TAS 7140

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Milabena wins 1, New Norfolk 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.

MetricMilabenaNew Norfolk
Median house price$525K$530K
Median unit price-$445K
Gross rental yield (houses)4.02%5.12%
Gross rental yield (units)-5.20%
1-year house growth+4.9%+15.1%
3-year house growth-+10.3%
Vacancy rate3.2%0.8%
Population776,037

Milabena vs New Norfolk: what the numbers say

The median house price is $525K in Milabena and $530K in New Norfolk, so Milabena is the cheaper entry point, with New Norfolk houses about 1% dearer.

On cash flow, New Norfolk leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 5.12%, compared with 4.02% in Milabena, a gap of 1.10 percentage points.

Over the past year house prices moved +4.9% in Milabena and +15.1% in New Norfolk, so recent momentum favours New Norfolk, although both suburbs recorded growth.

Rental vacancy is 0.8% in New Norfolk and 3.2% in Milabena, so landlords in New Norfolk face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.

New Norfolk is the bigger suburb, with a population of 6,037 against 77, roughly 78 times the size of Milabena; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: New Norfolk for rental income, Milabena for a lower purchase price, New Norfolk for recent price momentum, New Norfolk 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