Skip to main content

Molka vs Montmorency

Property investment comparison - Molka, VIC 3666 vs Montmorency, VIC 3094

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Molka wins 4, Montmorency 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.

MetricMolkaMontmorency
Median house price$1.2M$1.2M
Median unit price$360K$775K
Gross rental yield (houses)2.21%3.18%
Gross rental yield (units)4.75%3.86%
1-year house growth-+3.0%estimate
3-year house growth--
Vacancy rate0.7%1.1%
Population349,250

Molka vs Montmorency: what the numbers say

The median house price is $1.2M in Molka and $1.2M in Montmorency, so Molka is the cheaper entry point, with Montmorency houses about 1% dearer.

For units, Molka sits at a median of $360K against $775K in Montmorency, which makes Molka the more affordable unit market and Montmorency the pricier one.

On cash flow, Montmorency leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 3.18%, compared with 2.21% in Molka, a gap of 0.97 percentage points.

Rental vacancy is 0.7% in Molka and 1.1% in Montmorency, so landlords in Molka face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.

Montmorency is the bigger suburb, with a population of 9,250 against 34, roughly 272 times the size of Molka; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Montmorency for rental income, Molka for a lower purchase price, Molka 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