Waterford vs Wembley
Property investment comparison - Waterford, WA 6152 vs Wembley, WA 6014
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Waterford wins 1, Wembley 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 | Waterford | Wembley |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $2.0M | $1.9M |
| Median unit price | - | $555K |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | - | 2.80% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | 3.87% | 5.75% |
| 1-year house growth | +16.8%estimate | +9.8% |
| 3-year house growth | - | +37.5% |
| Vacancy rate | 4.0% | 0.9% |
| Population | 2,460 | 12,061 |
Waterford vs Wembley: what the numbers say
The median house price is $2.0M in Waterford and $1.9M in Wembley, so Wembley is the cheaper entry point, with Waterford houses about 2% dearer.
Over the past year house prices moved +16.8% in Waterford (an estimate) and +9.8% in Wembley, so recent momentum favours Waterford, although both suburbs recorded growth.
Rental vacancy is 0.9% in Wembley and 4.0% in Waterford, so landlords in Wembley face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.
Wembley is the bigger suburb, with a population of 12,061 against 2,460, roughly 4.9 times the size of Waterford; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Wembley for a lower purchase price, Waterford for recent price momentum, Wembley 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