Mount Alma vs Tully
Property investment comparison - Mount Alma, QLD 4680 vs Tully, QLD 4854
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Mount Alma wins 2, Tully 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 | Mount Alma | Tully |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $375K | $385K |
| Median unit price | - | - |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 7.95% | 5.13% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | - | 5.65% |
| 1-year house growth | - | +16.6%estimate |
| 3-year house growth | - | - |
| Vacancy rate | 2.1% | 0.0% |
| Population | 59 | 2,368 |
Mount Alma vs Tully: what the numbers say
The median house price is $375K in Mount Alma and $385K in Tully, so Mount Alma is the cheaper entry point, with Tully houses about 3% dearer.
On cash flow, Mount Alma leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 7.95%, compared with 5.13% in Tully, a gap of 2.82 percentage points.
Rental vacancy is 0.0% in Tully and 2.1% in Mount Alma, so landlords in Tully face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.
Tully is the bigger suburb, with a population of 2,368 against 59, roughly 40 times the size of Mount Alma; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Mount Alma for rental income, Mount Alma for a lower purchase price, Tully 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