Rubicon vs Seymour
Property investment comparison - Rubicon, VIC 3712 vs Seymour, VIC 3660
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Rubicon wins 1, Seymour wins 3. 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 | Rubicon | Seymour |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $470K | $460K |
| Median unit price | $195K | $295K |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 4.21% | 5.05% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | 4.19% | 6.52% |
| 1-year house growth | - | +3.9% |
| 3-year house growth | - | -3.2% |
| Vacancy rate | - | 0.8% |
| Population | 44 | 6,569 |
Rubicon vs Seymour: what the numbers say
The median house price is $470K in Rubicon and $460K in Seymour, so Seymour is the cheaper entry point, with Rubicon houses about 2% dearer.
For units, Rubicon sits at a median of $195K against $295K in Seymour, which makes Rubicon the more affordable unit market and Seymour the pricier one.
On cash flow, Seymour leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 5.05%, compared with 4.21% in Rubicon, a gap of 0.84 percentage points.
Seymour is the bigger suburb, with a population of 6,569 against 44, roughly 149 times the size of Rubicon; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Seymour for rental income, Seymour for a lower purchase price. 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