W Tree vs Wedderburn
Property investment comparison - W Tree, VIC 3885 vs Wedderburn, VIC 3518
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: W Tree wins 3, Wedderburn 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 | W Tree | Wedderburn |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $340K | $350K |
| Median unit price | - | $395K |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 8.36% | 4.98% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | - | 2.25% |
| 1-year house growth | - | +23.1% |
| 3-year house growth | - | +16.7% |
| Vacancy rate | 2.8% | 3.3% |
| Population | 47 | 951 |
W Tree vs Wedderburn: what the numbers say
The median house price is $340K in W Tree and $350K in Wedderburn, so W Tree is the cheaper entry point, with Wedderburn houses about 3% dearer.
On cash flow, W Tree leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 8.36%, compared with 4.98% in Wedderburn, a gap of 3.38 percentage points.
Rental vacancy is 2.8% in W Tree and 3.3% in Wedderburn, so landlords in W Tree face less competition for tenants.
Wedderburn is the bigger suburb, with a population of 951 against 47, roughly 20 times the size of W Tree; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: W Tree for rental income, W Tree for a lower purchase price, W Tree 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