Skip to main content

Run-O-Waters vs Valentine

Property investment comparison - Run-O-Waters, NSW 2580 vs Valentine, NSW 2280

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Run-O-Waters wins 2, Valentine 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.

MetricRun-O-WatersValentine
Median house price$1.4M$1.4M
Median unit price$560K$860K
Gross rental yield (houses)2.17%-
Gross rental yield (units)4.04%4.14%
1-year house growth+5.4%estimate+12.5%estimate
3-year house growth--
Vacancy rate0.8%4.3%
Population6055,773

Run-O-Waters vs Valentine: what the numbers say

Houses cost about the same in both suburbs: the median house price is $1.4M in Run-O-Waters and $1.4M in Valentine.

For units, Run-O-Waters sits at a median of $560K against $860K in Valentine, which makes Run-O-Waters the more affordable unit market and Valentine the pricier one.

Over the past year house prices moved +5.4% in Run-O-Waters (an estimate) and +12.5% in Valentine (an estimate), so recent momentum favours Valentine, although both suburbs recorded growth.

Rental vacancy is 0.8% in Run-O-Waters and 4.3% in Valentine, so landlords in Run-O-Waters face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.

Valentine is the bigger suburb, with a population of 5,773 against 605, roughly 10 times the size of Run-O-Waters; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Valentine for recent price momentum, Run-O-Waters 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