St Helens vs Tallangatta
Property investment comparison - St Helens, VIC 3285 vs Tallangatta, VIC 3700
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: St Helens wins 2, Tallangatta wins 0. 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 | St Helens | Tallangatta |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $520K | $520K |
| Median unit price | - | $175K |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 5.90% | 4.42% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | - | 7.53% |
| 1-year house growth | - | +7.7% |
| 3-year house growth | - | +10.6% |
| Vacancy rate | 2.5% | 2.9% |
| Population | 34 | 1,175 |
St Helens vs Tallangatta: what the numbers say
Houses cost about the same in both suburbs: the median house price is $520K in St Helens and $520K in Tallangatta.
On cash flow, St Helens leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 5.90%, compared with 4.42% in Tallangatta, a gap of 1.48 percentage points.
Rental vacancy is 2.5% in St Helens and 2.9% in Tallangatta, so landlords in St Helens face less competition for tenants.
Tallangatta is the bigger suburb, with a population of 1,175 against 34, roughly 35 times the size of St Helens; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: St Helens for rental income, St Helens for the tighter rental market. 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