Nambour vs Woodford
Property investment comparison - Nambour, QLD 4560 vs Woodford, QLD 4514
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Nambour wins 3, Woodford 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 | Nambour | Woodford |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $900K | $900K |
| Median unit price | $670K | - |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 4.01% | 3.90% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | - | 3.01% |
| 1-year house growth | +12.8% | +11.4%estimate |
| 3-year house growth | +33.8% | - |
| Vacancy rate | 0.5% | 0.5% |
| Population | 12,145 | 4,022 |
Nambour vs Woodford: what the numbers say
Houses cost about the same in both suburbs: the median house price is $900K in Nambour and $900K in Woodford.
On cash flow, Nambour leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 4.01%, compared with 3.90% in Woodford, a gap of 0.11 percentage points.
Over the past year house prices moved +12.8% in Nambour and +11.4% in Woodford (an estimate), so recent momentum favours Nambour, although both suburbs recorded growth.
Rental vacancy is the same in both, at 0.5%.
Nambour is the bigger suburb, with a population of 12,145 against 4,022, roughly 3.0 times the size of Woodford; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Nambour for rental income, Nambour for recent price momentum. 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