Skip to main content

Rosetta vs Shearwater

Property investment comparison - Rosetta, TAS 7010 vs Shearwater, TAS 7307

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Rosetta wins 3, Shearwater 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.

MetricRosettaShearwater
Median house price$725K$730K
Median unit price-$510K
Gross rental yield (houses)4.53%-
Gross rental yield (units)4.96%4.80%
1-year house growth+16.8%+9.6%
3-year house growth+6.2%+12.3%
Vacancy rate2.6%1.9%
Population2,8332,051

Rosetta vs Shearwater: what the numbers say

The median house price is $725K in Rosetta and $730K in Shearwater, so Rosetta is the cheaper entry point, with Shearwater houses about 1% dearer.

Over the past year house prices moved +16.8% in Rosetta and +9.6% in Shearwater, so recent momentum favours Rosetta, although both suburbs recorded growth.

Looking back three years, Rosetta houses are +6.2% and Shearwater houses +12.3%, so Shearwater has compounded faster than Rosetta over the longer window.

Rental vacancy is 1.9% in Shearwater and 2.6% in Rosetta, so landlords in Shearwater face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.

Rosetta is the bigger suburb, with a population of 2,833 against 2,051, larger than Shearwater; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Rosetta for a lower purchase price, Rosetta for recent price momentum, Shearwater 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
Rosetta vs Shearwater: Property Investment Comparison (2026)