Back to results

Katherine vs Wagaman — 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. Katherine

    NT · 0850
    27Below trend
    Median
    $445k
    5y growth
    4.8%/yr
    YieldThin market · ~1.3k residents

  2. Wagaman

    NT · 0810
    45Average
    Median
    $595k
    5y growth
    4.8%/yr
    BalancedStable entry · room to scale

Metric breakdown

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

Metric · weight
Katherine
Wagaman
Capital growth (5y)
weight 22%
484.8%/yr
484.8%/yr
Rental yield
weight 13%
844.2%
593.0%
Rental demand
weight 10%
402.4%
452.2%
Population growth
weight 12%
717.1%
717.1%
Income growth
weight 12%
4010.0%
5213.0%
Construction pipeline
weight 15%
0–
0–
Affordability
weight 8%
6363% under cap
5050% under cap
Supply tightening
weight 8%
30+4.0% YoY
45+1.0% YoY

Winner per dimension

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

  1. Katherine

    2/8
    • Rental yield
    • Affordability

  2. Wagaman

    3/8
    • Rental demand
    • Income growth
    • Supply tightening

Why Katherine

Thin market · ~1.3k residents

4.2% gross yield, population +7.1% (5y).

Drivers
  • Rental yield4.2%
  • Population growth+7.1% (5y)
  • Budget headroom63% under cap
Risks
  • Only 1,254 residents — illiquid, slow to sell
  • No major construction project in this state

Why Wagaman

Stable entry · room to scale

population +7.1% (5y), 3.0% gross yield.

Drivers
  • Population growth+7.1% (5y)
Risks
  • No major construction project in this state