Multiple suburbs found — pick one
Suburb medians here are indicative approximations for 2026, carried in this page’s own lookup table. They are not a dated data feed and this repository holds no capture date for them, so treat any single suburb figure as a starting point and check your own suburb’s current median before relying on the dollar amounts. The breakeven percentage below does not depend on the price at all (rent is estimated as a flat 3.5% gross yield nationwide), so price currency affects the dollar figures only.
Your property needs to grow at least
per year to beat the ASX
Adjust the inputs above or type a suburb / price to see your personalised breakeven growth rate.
Property price
—
Deposit
—
ASX target
—
Monthly mortgage
—
Time horizon
—
Breakeven wealth
—
Historical 30yr average growth by city (CoreLogic/Cotality)
Sydney
5.4%
30yr avg
Melbourne
5.1%
30yr avg
Brisbane
5.1%
30yr avg
Perth
4.9%
30yr avg
Adelaide
5.2%
30yr avg
Hobart
4.4%
30yr avg
Canberra
5.0%
30yr avg
ASX 200
9.7%
incl. dividends
The bar this model sets is nearly the same for every city: about 4.32% annual growth over 20 years, or 4.78% over 30, at a 20% deposit and a 6.2% mortgage against an 8.5% ASX return. Rent is estimated as a flat 3.5% gross yield of the purchase price nationwide, so price cancels out of the percentage except through the tax brackets on the share gain, which move it by a few hundredths of a point between a $400,000 and a $3,200,000 home. Compare each city’s own history against that bar.
How this works
This calculator finds the minimum annual property growth rate your home needs to achieve so that your net equity after n years equals what you'd have built by investing your deposit in the ASX instead — with the monthly mortgage-minus-rent savings also going into shares.
It uses a cashflow-neutral model: both paths start with the same deposit and face the same monthly outgoing. The property buyer pays a mortgage; the renter invests the deposit and tops it up monthly with any savings. The breakeven rate is solved numerically.
Why the number is usually surprising: Leverage works both ways. A 20% deposit controls a 5× asset, so property doesn't need to match share returns — it just needs to grow fast enough that the leveraged gain beats the compounding portfolio. But mortgage interest costs erode that advantage significantly, especially in the early years.
Use the benchmark table above to compare your breakeven rate against what each city has historically delivered. If your required rate is above the historical average for your city, shares have had the edge — and you'd need above-average growth to justify buying purely on wealth grounds.
Want the full picture?
This tool gives you the breakeven rate. The full Tepuy model shows you the complete 30-year wealth comparison including stamp duty, CGT, negative gearing, and Monte Carlo risk scenarios.
Open the full model → Read: Should you buy or rent in every Australian city? →⚡ Tepuy+ Pro — A$12.99/mo
CSV export · Save & load scenarios · CGT modelling · Advanced results
Capital gains tax rate: The gain in the sale year is added to $135,001 of other taxable income (the bottom of the 37% bracket this page assumes) and taxed through the resident rates for that income year, plus 2% Medicare and the 30% minimum-tax top-up on the part from 1 July 2027. The brackets are held at their legislated values for every future year, so real bracket creep is not modelled. Offsets such as the low income tax offset (LITO) and the seniors and pensioners tax offset (SAPTO) are ignored, and all assets are sold in the final year as one lump. See the worked example.
Disclaimer: This calculator is for educational purposes only and does not constitute financial advice. The breakeven is solved against the same Property vs Shares engine the full calculator runs, so capital gains tax and the 1 July 2027 reform ARE applied on the share side — with a fixed 37% marginal rate while you hold, because this page has no tax control, and the gain in the sale year added to $135,001 of other taxable income (the bottom of the 37% bracket) and taxed through the resident brackets, plus Medicare and the 30% minimum-tax top-up. Including tax (this fixed 37% marginal rate, capital gains tax and the reform) moves the required growth rate 1.0–2.0 percentage points lower than a run with no tax at all (a share sale wholly before 1 July 2027 at a flat 0% rate, where the 30% minimum tax cannot apply), across seven combinations tested at a 6.2% mortgage rate (6.5% for the largest): from 1.0 points on a 3-year hold to 2.0 on a 25-year hold at a 9% share return. Rent is still a flat 3.5% national gross yield and grows 3% a year; stamp duty is charged at zero, deliberately, so the only thing that moves the rate with the price is the tax brackets on the share gain (a few hundredths of a point between $400,000 and $3,200,000). Negative gearing and depreciation are not modelled. Always consult a licensed financial adviser before making investment decisions. Historical growth rates are sourced from CoreLogic/Cotality data and do not guarantee future performance. Enacted law (Acts No. 49 and 50 of 2026, including the Treasury Laws Amendment (Tax Reform No. 1) Act 2026): for individuals and trusts the 50% CGT discount is kept on the part of a gain that accrued before 1 July 2027, whenever the asset is sold, and gains accruing from 1 July 2027 use CPI cost-base indexation, with a 30% minimum tax for resident individuals that does not apply in a year they receive the Age Pension or certain other income-support payments. New residential dwellings and affordable housing keep a discount (50%, or up to 60% for affordable housing) instead of indexation and the minimum tax, with a choice of indexation where the Act allows, and a pre-CGT asset is treated as sold and reacquired on 1 July 2027 so that only the gain from that date is taxed; the Act's other conditions apply. This tool applies the 30% minimum tax in every case; by law it applies to resident individuals and not in a year the person receives the Age Pension or listed income-support payments (s 119-15), so figures for Age Pension recipients are overstated.