Nalangil vs Richmond
Property investment comparison - Nalangil, VIC 3249 vs Richmond, VIC 3121
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Nalangil wins 2, Richmond 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 | Nalangil | Richmond |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $1.4M | $1.4M |
| Median unit price | - | $780K |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 1.78% | 3.41% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | - | 4.13% |
| 1-year house growth | - | -3.2%estimate |
| 3-year house growth | - | - |
| Vacancy rate | 1.1% | 1.8% |
| Population | 72 | 28,587 |
Nalangil vs Richmond: what the numbers say
The median house price is $1.4M in Nalangil and $1.4M in Richmond, so Nalangil is the cheaper entry point.
On cash flow, Richmond leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 3.41%, compared with 1.78% in Nalangil, a gap of 1.63 percentage points.
Rental vacancy is 1.1% in Nalangil and 1.8% in Richmond, so landlords in Nalangil face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.
Richmond is the bigger suburb, with a population of 28,587 against 72, roughly 397 times the size of Nalangil; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Richmond for rental income, Nalangil for a lower purchase price, Nalangil 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