Back to results

Logan Central vs Tuart Hill — which is best for yield?

Same eight metrics, scored against the same benchmark, ranked against a $1.00Mbudget. Look for where one suburb is materially ahead — that's the dimension that should sway your call.

  1. Logan Central

    QLD · 4114
    65Strong
    Median
    $575k
    5y growth
    9.4%/yr
    GrowthStable entry · room to scale

  2. Tuart Hill

    WA · 6060
    64Strong
    Median
    $845k
    5y growth
    9.8%/yr
    GrowthGrowth-led, low cashflow

Metric breakdown

Each row scores 0–100 against a fixed benchmark. The leader on each row is highlighted.

Metric · weight
Logan Central
Tuart Hill
Capital growth (5y)
weight 22%
949.4%/yr
989.8%/yr
Rental yield
weight 13%
512.5%
392.0%
Rental demand
weight 10%
701.2%
751.0%
Population growth
weight 12%
10010.0%
10012.6%
Income growth
weight 12%
7218.0%
7218.0%
Construction pipeline
weight 15%
0–
0–
Affordability
weight 8%
4343% under cap
1616% under cap
Supply tightening
weight 8%
85-7.0% YoY
95-9.0% YoY

Winner per dimension

Where each suburb leads the field, with the count of dimensions won.

  1. Logan Central

    2/8
    • Rental yield
    • Affordability

  2. Tuart Hill

    3/8
    • Capital growth (5y)
    • Rental demand
    • Supply tightening

Why Logan Central

Stable entry · room to scale

population +10.0% (5y), 9.4%/yr capital growth.

Drivers
  • Population growth+10.0% (5y)
  • Capital growth9.4%/yr
  • Supply tightening-7.0% YoY
  • Income growth+18.0% (5y)
Risks
  • No major construction project in this state

Construction ·Cross River Rail — Boggo Road17.9 kmConstruction · 2026

Why Tuart Hill

Growth-led, low cashflow

population +12.6% (5y), 9.8%/yr capital growth.

Drivers
  • Population growth+12.6% (5y)
  • Capital growth9.8%/yr
  • Supply tightening-9.0% YoY
  • Tight rentals1.0%
Risks
  • Thin gross yield (2.0%)
  • No major construction project in this state