Skip to main content

Richmond vs Seaholme

Property investment comparison - Richmond, VIC 3121 vs Seaholme, VIC 3018

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Richmond wins 3, Seaholme wins 2. 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.

MetricRichmondSeaholme
Median house price$1.4M$1.3M
Median unit price$780K-
Gross rental yield (houses)3.41%2.63%
Gross rental yield (units)4.13%2.92%
1-year house growth-3.2%estimate+2.2%estimate
3-year house growth--
Vacancy rate1.8%1.9%
Population28,5872,067

Richmond vs Seaholme: what the numbers say

The median house price is $1.4M in Richmond and $1.3M in Seaholme, so Seaholme is the cheaper entry point, with Richmond houses about 1% dearer.

On cash flow, Richmond leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 3.41%, compared with 2.63% in Seaholme, a gap of 0.78 percentage points.

Over the past year house prices moved -3.2% in Richmond (an estimate) and +2.2% in Seaholme (an estimate), so recent momentum favours Seaholme, while Richmond went backwards.

Rental vacancy is 1.8% in Richmond and 1.9% in Seaholme, so landlords in Richmond 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 2,067, roughly 14 times the size of Seaholme; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Richmond for rental income, Seaholme for a lower purchase price, Seaholme for recent price momentum, Richmond 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