Skip to main content

Rifle Range vs Tingalpa

Property investment comparison - Rifle Range, QLD 4311 vs Tingalpa, QLD 4173

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Rifle Range wins 2, Tingalpa 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.

MetricRifle RangeTingalpa
Median house price$1.2M$1.2M
Median unit price-$815K
Gross rental yield (houses)2.73%3.30%
Gross rental yield (units)--
1-year house growth+16.0%+12.8%estimate
3-year house growth+61.6%-
Vacancy rate8.5%1.0%
Population1978,461

Rifle Range vs Tingalpa: what the numbers say

The median house price is $1.2M in Rifle Range and $1.2M in Tingalpa, so Rifle Range is the cheaper entry point.

On cash flow, Tingalpa leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 3.30%, compared with 2.73% in Rifle Range, a gap of 0.57 percentage points.

Over the past year house prices moved +16.0% in Rifle Range and +12.8% in Tingalpa (an estimate), so recent momentum favours Rifle Range, although both suburbs recorded growth.

Rental vacancy is 1.0% in Tingalpa and 8.5% in Rifle Range, so landlords in Tingalpa face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.

Tingalpa is the bigger suburb, with a population of 8,461 against 197, roughly 43 times the size of Rifle Range; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Tingalpa for rental income, Rifle Range for a lower purchase price, Rifle Range for recent price momentum, Tingalpa 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