Skip to main content

Mulgoa vs Wakeley

Property investment comparison - Mulgoa, NSW 2745 vs Wakeley, NSW 2176

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Mulgoa wins 3, Wakeley 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.

MetricMulgoaWakeley
Median house price$1.4M$1.4M
Median unit price$755K-
Gross rental yield (houses)3.62%2.59%
Gross rental yield (units)4.53%3.80%
1-year house growth+20.2%estimate+9.0%
3-year house growth-+28.6%
Vacancy rate2.5%2.0%
Population2,0444,893

Mulgoa vs Wakeley: what the numbers say

Houses cost about the same in both suburbs: the median house price is $1.4M in Mulgoa and $1.4M in Wakeley.

On cash flow, Mulgoa leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 3.62%, compared with 2.59% in Wakeley, a gap of 1.03 percentage points.

Over the past year house prices moved +20.2% in Mulgoa (an estimate) and +9.0% in Wakeley, so recent momentum favours Mulgoa, although both suburbs recorded growth.

Rental vacancy is 2.0% in Wakeley and 2.5% in Mulgoa, so landlords in Wakeley face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.

Wakeley is the bigger suburb, with a population of 4,893 against 2,044, roughly 2.4 times the size of Mulgoa; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Mulgoa for rental income, Mulgoa for recent price momentum, Wakeley 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