Skip to main content

Salter Point vs Subiaco

Property investment comparison - Salter Point, WA 6152 vs Subiaco, WA 6008

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Salter Point wins 0, Subiaco 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.

MetricSalter PointSubiaco
Median house price$2.2M$2.2M
Median unit price-$815K
Gross rental yield (houses)2.50%2.70%
Gross rental yield (units)4.89%-
1-year house growth+15.8%+21.2%estimate
3-year house growth+43.3%-
Vacancy rate1.1%0.8%
Population2,9139,940

Salter Point vs Subiaco: what the numbers say

Houses cost about the same in both suburbs: the median house price is $2.2M in Salter Point and $2.2M in Subiaco.

On cash flow, Subiaco leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 2.70%, compared with 2.50% in Salter Point, a gap of 0.20 percentage points.

Over the past year house prices moved +15.8% in Salter Point and +21.2% in Subiaco (an estimate), so recent momentum favours Subiaco, although both suburbs recorded growth.

Rental vacancy is 0.8% in Subiaco and 1.1% in Salter Point, so landlords in Subiaco face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.

Subiaco is the bigger suburb, with a population of 9,940 against 2,913, roughly 3.4 times the size of Salter Point; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Subiaco for rental income, Subiaco for recent price momentum, Subiaco 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