Back to results

Holland Park vs Logan Central — which is best for yield?

Same eight metrics, scored against the same benchmark, ranked against a $1.20Mbudget. Look for where one suburb is materially ahead — that's the dimension that should sway your call.

  1. Holland Park

    QLD · 4121
    62Strong
    Median
    $1.15M
    5y growth
    11.5%/yr
    GrowthStable but fully priced

  2. Logan Central

    QLD · 4114
    66Strong
    Median
    $575k
    5y growth
    9.4%/yr
    GrowthStable entry · room to scale

Metric breakdown

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

Metric · weight
Holland Park
Logan Central
Capital growth (5y)
weight 22%
10011.5%/yr
949.4%/yr
Rental yield
weight 13%
351.8%
512.5%
Rental demand
weight 10%
701.2%
701.2%
Population growth
weight 12%
10010.0%
10010.0%
Income growth
weight 12%
7218.0%
7218.0%
Construction pipeline
weight 15%
2$0.1bn
0–
Affordability
weight 8%
55% under cap
5252% under cap
Supply tightening
weight 8%
85-7.0% YoY
85-7.0% YoY

Winner per dimension

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

  1. Holland Park

    2/8
    • Capital growth (5y)
    • Construction pipeline

  2. Logan Central

    2/8
    • Rental yield
    • Affordability

Why Holland Park

Stable but fully priced

11.5%/yr capital growth, population +10.0% (5y).

Drivers
  • Capital growth11.5%/yr
  • Population growth+10.0% (5y)
  • Supply tightening-7.0% YoY
  • Income growth+18.0% (5y)
Risks
  • At top of budget (95% of cap)
  • Thin gross yield (1.8%)

Construction ·Cross River Rail — Boggo Road3.9 kmConstruction · 2026

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