Perth vs Table Cape
Property investment comparison - Perth, TAS 7300 vs Table Cape, TAS 7325
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Perth wins 3, Table Cape 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 | Perth | Table Cape |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $715K | $710K |
| Median unit price | - | $445K |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 4.30% | 3.21% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | 4.72% | 4.68% |
| 1-year house growth | +19.2% | - |
| 3-year house growth | +15.1% | - |
| Vacancy rate | 1.3% | 3.2% |
| Population | 3,472 | 87 |
Perth vs Table Cape: what the numbers say
The median house price is $715K in Perth and $710K in Table Cape, so Table Cape is the cheaper entry point, with Perth houses about 1% dearer.
On cash flow, Perth leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 4.30%, compared with 3.21% in Table Cape, a gap of 1.09 percentage points.
Rental vacancy is 1.3% in Perth and 3.2% in Table Cape, so landlords in Perth face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.
Perth is the bigger suburb, with a population of 3,472 against 87, roughly 40 times the size of Table Cape; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Perth for rental income, Table Cape for a lower purchase price, Perth 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