Back to results

Red Cliffs vs Kerang — which is best for yield?

Same eight metrics, scored against the same benchmark, ranked against a $400kbudget. Look for where one suburb is materially ahead — that's the dimension that should sway your call.

  1. Red Cliffs

    VIC · 3496
    52Average
    Median
    $400k
    5y growth
    13.0%/yr
    GrowthStable but fully priced

  2. Kerang

    VIC · 3579
    48Average
    Median
    $265k
    5y growth
    9.3%/yr
    BalancedThin market · ~4k residents

Metric breakdown

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

Metric · weight
Red Cliffs
Kerang
Capital growth (5y)
weight 22%
10013.0%/yr
939.3%/yr
Rental yield
weight 13%
623.1%
783.9%
Rental demand
weight 10%
402.4%
402.4%
Population growth
weight 12%
787.8%
787.8%
Income growth
weight 12%
5213.0%
5213.0%
Construction pipeline
weight 15%
0–
0–
Affordability
weight 8%
0Over cap
3434% under cap
Supply tightening
weight 8%
25+5.0% YoY
25+5.0% YoY

Winner per dimension

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

  1. Red Cliffs

    1/8
    • Capital growth (5y)

  2. Kerang

    2/8
    • Rental yield
    • Affordability

Why Red Cliffs

Stable but fully priced

13.0%/yr capital growth, population +7.8% (5y).

Drivers
  • Capital growth13.0%/yr
  • Population growth+7.8% (5y)
  • Rental yield3.1%
Risks
  • At top of budget (100% of cap)
  • No major construction project in this state

Construction ·Melbourne Airport Rail — Sunshine Hub454.0 kmApproved · 2033

Why Kerang

Thin market · ~4k residents

9.3%/yr capital growth, 3.9% gross yield.

Drivers
  • Capital growth9.3%/yr
  • Rental yield3.9%
  • Population growth+7.8% (5y)
Risks
  • Only 3,960 residents — illiquid, slow to sell
  • No major construction project in this state

Construction ·Melbourne Airport Rail — Sunshine Hub241.3 kmApproved · 2033