Back to results

Spring Hill vs Midland — which is best for infrastructure?

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. Spring Hill

    QLD · 4000
    71Strong
    Median
    $1.50M
    5y growth
    8.2%/yr
    GrowthStable but fully priced

  2. Midland

    WA · 6056
    67Strong
    Median
    $545k
    5y growth
    10.5%/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
Spring Hill
Midland
Capital growth (5y)
weight 22%
828.2%/yr
10010.5%/yr
Rental yield
weight 13%
291.4%
562.8%
Rental demand
weight 10%
681.3%
701.2%
Population growth
weight 12%
10010.0%
10012.6%
Income growth
weight 12%
8020.0%
6416.0%
Construction pipeline
weight 15%
100$5.0bn
0–
Affordability
weight 8%
00% under cap
6464% under cap
Supply tightening
weight 8%
80-6.0% YoY
70-4.0% YoY

Winner per dimension

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

  1. Spring Hill

    3/8
    • Income growth
    • Construction pipeline
    • Supply tightening

  2. Midland

    4/8
    • Capital growth (5y)
    • Rental yield
    • Rental demand
    • Affordability

Why Spring Hill

Stable but fully priced

population +10.0% (5y), $5.0bn pipeline incl. Cross River Rail — Roma Street.

Drivers
  • Population growth+10.0% (5y)
  • Infrastructure pipeline$5.0bn nearby
  • Capital growth8.2%/yr
  • Income growth+20.0% (5y)
Risks
  • At top of budget (100% of cap)
  • Thin gross yield (1.4%)

Construction ·Cross River Rail — Roma Street0.8 kmConstruction · 2026

Why Midland

Stable entry · room to scale

10.5%/yr capital growth, population +12.6% (5y).

Drivers
  • Capital growth10.5%/yr
  • Population growth+12.6% (5y)
  • Tight rentals1.2%
  • Supply tightening-4.0% YoY
Risks
  • No major construction project in this state