Mount Helen vs Ullina
Property investment comparison - Mount Helen, VIC 3350 vs Ullina, VIC 3370
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Mount Helen wins 0, Ullina 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 Helen | Ullina |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $735K | $735K |
| Median unit price | $350K | - |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 3.32% | - |
| Gross rental yield (units) | 5.83% | - |
| 1-year house growth | +16.6% | - |
| 3-year house growth | +24.1% | - |
| Vacancy rate | 1.5% | 0.7% |
| Population | 3,011 | 25 |
Mount Helen vs Ullina: what the numbers say
Houses cost about the same in both suburbs: the median house price is $735K in Mount Helen and $735K in Ullina.
Rental vacancy is 0.7% in Ullina and 1.5% in Mount Helen, so landlords in Ullina face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.
Mount Helen is the bigger suburb, with a population of 3,011 against 25, roughly 120 times the size of Ullina; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Ullina 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