Skip to main content

Murchison vs Walmer

Property investment comparison - Murchison, VIC 3610 vs Walmer, VIC 3463

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Murchison wins 2, Walmer wins 3. 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.

MetricMurchisonWalmer
Median house price$425K$405K
Median unit price-$440K
Gross rental yield (houses)5.29%7.20%
Gross rental yield (units)7.79%3.12%
1-year house growth+7.7%estimate+1.4%
3-year house growth--
Vacancy rate3.7%2.0%
Population884262

Murchison vs Walmer: what the numbers say

The median house price is $425K in Murchison and $405K in Walmer, so Walmer is the cheaper entry point, with Murchison houses about 5% dearer.

On cash flow, Walmer leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 7.20%, compared with 5.29% in Murchison, a gap of 1.91 percentage points.

Over the past year house prices moved +7.7% in Murchison (an estimate) and +1.4% in Walmer, so recent momentum favours Murchison, although both suburbs recorded growth.

Rental vacancy is 2.0% in Walmer and 3.7% in Murchison, so landlords in Walmer face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.

Murchison is the bigger suburb, with a population of 884 against 262, roughly 3.4 times the size of Walmer; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Walmer for rental income, Walmer for a lower purchase price, Murchison for recent price momentum, Walmer 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