Back to results

Broome vs Midland — which is best for growth?

Same eight metrics, scored against the same benchmark, ranked against a $700kbudget. Look for where one suburb is materially ahead — that's the dimension that should sway your call.

  1. Broome

    WA · 6725
    42Below trend
    Median
    $645k
    5y growth
    6.6%/yr
    BalancedThin market · ~4k residents

  2. Midland

    WA · 6056
    63Strong
    Median
    $545k
    5y growth
    10.5%/yr
    GrowthStable entry point

Metric breakdown

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

Metric · weight
Broome
Midland
Capital growth (5y)
weight 22%
666.6%/yr
10010.5%/yr
Rental yield
weight 13%
482.4%
562.8%
Rental demand
weight 10%
502.0%
701.2%
Population growth
weight 12%
10012.6%
10012.6%
Income growth
weight 12%
6015.0%
6416.0%
Construction pipeline
weight 15%
0–
0–
Affordability
weight 8%
88% under cap
2222% under cap
Supply tightening
weight 8%
40+2.0% YoY
70-4.0% YoY

Winner per dimension

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

  1. Broome

    0/8

    No outright lead on any single dimension.

  2. Midland

    6/8
    • Capital growth (5y)
    • Rental yield
    • Rental demand
    • Income growth
    • Affordability
    • Supply tightening

Why Broome

Thin market · ~4k residents

population +12.6% (5y), 6.6%/yr capital growth.

Drivers
  • Population growth+12.6% (5y)
  • Capital growth6.6%/yr
  • Income growth+15.0% (5y)
Risks
  • Only 3,797 residents — illiquid, slow to sell
  • At top of budget (92% of cap)

Why Midland

Stable entry point

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