Webbs Creek vs Young
Property investment comparison - Webbs Creek, NSW 2775 vs Young, NSW 2594
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Webbs Creek wins 0, Young 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.
| Metric | Webbs Creek | Young |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $530K | $525K |
| Median unit price | - | $425K |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | - | 4.79% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | - | 4.52% |
| 1-year house growth | - | +6.1% |
| 3-year house growth | - | +19.4% |
| Vacancy rate | 2.4% | 1.0% |
| Population | 55 | 10,610 |
Webbs Creek vs Young: what the numbers say
The median house price is $530K in Webbs Creek and $525K in Young, so Young is the cheaper entry point, with Webbs Creek houses about 1% dearer.
Rental vacancy is 1.0% in Young and 2.4% in Webbs Creek, so landlords in Young face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.
Young is the bigger suburb, with a population of 10,610 against 55, roughly 193 times the size of Webbs Creek; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Young for a lower purchase price, Young 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