Myrtleford vs Tarrone
Property investment comparison - Myrtleford, VIC 3737 vs Tarrone, VIC 3283
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Myrtleford wins 2, Tarrone wins 0. 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 | Myrtleford | Tarrone |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $650K | $650K |
| Median unit price | - | - |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 3.86% | 3.02% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | - | - |
| 1-year house growth | +11.6% | - |
| 3-year house growth | +8.0% | - |
| Vacancy rate | 0.7% | 5.9% |
| Population | 3,285 | 69 |
Myrtleford vs Tarrone: what the numbers say
Houses cost about the same in both suburbs: the median house price is $650K in Myrtleford and $650K in Tarrone.
On cash flow, Myrtleford leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 3.86%, compared with 3.02% in Tarrone, a gap of 0.84 percentage points.
Rental vacancy is 0.7% in Myrtleford and 5.9% in Tarrone, so landlords in Myrtleford face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.
Myrtleford is the bigger suburb, with a population of 3,285 against 69, roughly 48 times the size of Tarrone; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Myrtleford for rental income, Myrtleford 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