Skip to main content

Mulgrave vs Tarrengower

Property investment comparison - Mulgrave, VIC 3170 vs Tarrengower, VIC 3463

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Mulgrave wins 2, Tarrengower 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.

MetricMulgraveTarrengower
Median house price$1.1M$1.1M
Median unit price$850K$825K
Gross rental yield (houses)3.14%2.49%
Gross rental yield (units)-1.86%
1-year house growth+2.3%-
3-year house growth+14.7%-
Vacancy rate1.9%3.5%
Population19,88956

Mulgrave vs Tarrengower: what the numbers say

Houses cost about the same in both suburbs: the median house price is $1.1M in Mulgrave and $1.1M in Tarrengower.

For units, Mulgrave sits at a median of $850K against $825K in Tarrengower, which makes Tarrengower the more affordable unit market and Mulgrave the pricier one.

On cash flow, Mulgrave leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 3.14%, compared with 2.49% in Tarrengower, a gap of 0.65 percentage points.

Rental vacancy is 1.9% in Mulgrave and 3.5% in Tarrengower, so landlords in Mulgrave face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.

Mulgrave is the bigger suburb, with a population of 19,889 against 56, roughly 355 times the size of Tarrengower; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Mulgrave for rental income, Mulgrave 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