Back to results

Warrane vs Claremont — 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. Warrane

    TAS · 7018
    48Average
    Median
    $645k
    5y growth
    7.2%/yr
    GrowthGrowth-led, low cashflow

  2. Claremont

    TAS · 7011
    49Average
    Median
    $595k
    5y growth
    7.8%/yr
    GrowthStable entry point

Metric breakdown

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

Metric · weight
Warrane
Claremont
Capital growth (5y)
weight 22%
727.2%/yr
787.8%/yr
Rental yield
weight 13%
482.4%
562.8%
Rental demand
weight 10%
681.3%
681.3%
Population growth
weight 12%
313.1%
313.1%
Income growth
weight 12%
5614.0%
5213.0%
Construction pipeline
weight 15%
0–
0$0.0bn
Affordability
weight 8%
2828% under cap
3434% under cap
Supply tightening
weight 8%
75-5.0% YoY
70-4.0% YoY

Winner per dimension

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

  1. Warrane

    2/8
    • Income growth
    • Supply tightening

  2. Claremont

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

Why Warrane

Growth-led, low cashflow

listings tightening 5.0% YoY, 7.2%/yr capital growth.

Drivers
  • Supply tightening-5.0% YoY
  • Capital growth7.2%/yr
  • Tight rentals1.3%
Risks
  • Thin gross yield (2.4%)
  • No major construction project in this state

Construction ·Macquarie Point Stadium3.8 kmPlanned · 2029

Why Claremont

Stable entry point

7.8%/yr capital growth, listings tightening 4.0% YoY.

Drivers
  • Capital growth7.8%/yr
  • Supply tightening-4.0% YoY
  • Tight rentals1.3%
Risks

No material risk flags raised by the model.

Construction ·New Bridgewater Bridge4.9 kmConstruction · 2025