Zuccoli vs Leanyer vs Katherine — which is best for yield?

Same eight metrics, scored against the same benchmark, ranked against a $900kbudget. Look for where one suburb is materially ahead — that's the dimension that should sway your call.

Zuccoli
NT · 0832
50Average
Median
$695k
5y growth
6.2%/yr
YieldStable entry point
Leanyer
NT · 0812
44Below trend
Median
$645k
5y growth
4.8%/yr
BalancedStable entry point
Katherine
NT · 0850
26Below trend
Median
$445k
5y growth
4.8%/yr
YieldThin market · ~1.3k residents

Metric breakdown

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

Metric · weight

Zuccoli

Leanyer

Katherine

Capital growth (5y)

weight 22%

626.2%/yr

484.8%/yr

Rental yield

weight 13%

824.1%

643.2%

844.2%

Rental demand

weight 10%

502.0%

452.2%

402.4%

Population growth

weight 12%

717.1%

Income growth

weight 12%

5614.0%

5213.0%

4010.0%

Construction pipeline

weight 15%

0–

Affordability

weight 8%

2323% under cap

2828% under cap

5151% under cap

Supply tightening

weight 8%

500.0% YoY

45+1.0% YoY

30+4.0% YoY

Winner per dimension

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

Zuccoli
4/8
- Capital growth (5y)
- Rental demand
- Income growth
- Supply tightening
Leanyer
0/8
No outright lead on any single dimension.
Katherine
2/8
- Rental yield
- Affordability

Why Zuccoli

Stable entry point

4.1% gross yield, population +7.1% (5y).

Drivers

Rental yield4.1%
Population growth+7.1% (5y)
Capital growth6.2%/yr

Risks

No major construction project in this state

Why Leanyer

Stable entry point

population +7.1% (5y), 3.2% gross yield.

Drivers

Population growth+7.1% (5y)
Rental yield3.2%

Risks

No major construction project in this state

Why Katherine

Thin market · ~1.3k residents

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

Drivers

Rental yield4.2%
Population growth+7.1% (5y)

Risks

Only 1,254 residents — illiquid, slow to sell
No major construction project in this state