Back to results

Curtin vs Casey — which is best for growth?

Same eight metrics, scored against the same benchmark, ranked against a $1.50Mbudget. Look for where one suburb is materially ahead — that's the dimension that should sway your call.

  1. Curtin

    ACT · 2605
    51Average
    Median
    $1.15M
    5y growth
    6.2%/yr
    GrowthGrowth-led, low cashflow

  2. Casey

    ACT · 2913
    63Strong
    Median
    $845k
    5y growth
    9.2%/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
Curtin
Casey
Capital growth (5y)
weight 22%
626.2%/yr
929.2%/yr
Rental yield
weight 13%
412.0%
623.1%
Rental demand
weight 10%
681.3%
681.3%
Population growth
weight 12%
919.1%
919.1%
Income growth
weight 12%
6416.0%
6817.0%
Construction pipeline
weight 15%
0–
0–
Affordability
weight 8%
2424% under cap
4444% under cap
Supply tightening
weight 8%
65-3.0% YoY
70-4.0% YoY

Winner per dimension

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

  1. Curtin

    0/8

    No outright lead on any single dimension.

  2. Casey

    5/8
    • Capital growth (5y)
    • Rental yield
    • Income growth
    • Affordability
    • Supply tightening

Why Curtin

Growth-led, low cashflow

population +9.1% (5y), tight 1.3% vacancy.

Drivers
  • Population growth+9.1% (5y)
  • Tight rentals1.3%
  • Supply tightening-3.0% YoY
  • Income growth+16.0% (5y)
Risks
  • Thin gross yield (2.0%)
  • No major construction project in this state

Why Casey

Stable entry · room to scale

9.2%/yr capital growth, population +9.1% (5y).

Drivers
  • Capital growth9.2%/yr
  • Population growth+9.1% (5y)
  • Supply tightening-4.0% YoY
  • Income growth+17.0% (5y)
Risks
  • No major construction project in this state