Back to results

Zuccoli vs Rapid Creek — 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.

  1. Zuccoli

    NT · 0832
    50Average
    Median
    $695k
    5y growth
    6.2%/yr
    YieldStable entry point

  2. Rapid Creek

    NT · 0810
    41Below trend
    Median
    $695k
    5y growth
    4.4%/yr
    BalancedStable entry point

Metric breakdown

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

Metric · weight
Zuccoli
Rapid Creek
Capital growth (5y)
weight 22%
626.2%/yr
444.4%/yr
Rental yield
weight 13%
824.1%
522.6%
Rental demand
weight 10%
502.0%
452.2%
Population growth
weight 12%
717.1%
717.1%
Income growth
weight 12%
5614.0%
5213.0%
Construction pipeline
weight 15%
0–
0–
Affordability
weight 8%
2323% under cap
2323% under cap
Supply tightening
weight 8%
500.0% YoY
45+1.0% YoY

Winner per dimension

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

  1. Zuccoli

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

  2. Rapid Creek

    0/8

    No outright lead on any single dimension.

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 Rapid Creek

Stable entry point

population +7.1% (5y), 2.6% gross yield.

Drivers
  • Population growth+7.1% (5y)
Risks
  • No major construction project in this state