The Melbourne suburbs where house prices are rising fastest
Melbourne's median house price rose 1.6 per cent to almost $1,064,000 in the 12 months to June, the latest Domain House Price Report this week showed.
Domain chief of research and economics Dr Nicola Powell said the quarterly growth rate of 2.3 per cent appeared to show Melbourne's property market was exiting its years-long slump.
'Largely, what we've got is a turn-around in market conditions across Melbourne,' she said. 'It's the sharpest lift in 3½ years for house prices and the sharpest in two years for unit prices.'
House prices rose the most in Aberfeldie, up 21.6 per cent in the year to June to a median of $1,946,000. It was followed by Fairfield, up 18.8 per cent to $1.63 million, and Heidelberg, up 14.3 per cent to $1,308,000.
Unit prices rose the most in Moorabbin, climbing 25.9 per cent over the same period to a median of $750,000. Next was Caulfield South, up 25.3 per cent to $799,000, and Fairfield, up 20.1 per cent to $587,000.
Powell said the large movement in house prices in some suburbs appeared to be driven by families looking to upgrade to a larger home before forecast Reserve Bank rate cuts prompt more growth.
'Melbourne has underperformed in relation to other capital cities … and families are looking to take advantage of that value before prices rise further,' she said. 'The top performer for house prices, Aberfeldie, is really up there. Riverside location, period homes … it's prime for families.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Advertiser
2 hours ago
- The Advertiser
US central bank leaves interest rates unchanged
The US Federal Reserve has left its key short-term interest rate unchanged for the fifth time this year, brushing off repeated calls from President Donald Trump for a cut. The Fed's decision on Wednesday leaves its key short-term rate at about 4.3 per cent, where it has stood after the US central bank reduced it three times last year. Chair Jerome Powell has said the Fed would likely have cut rates already if not for Trump's sweeping tariffs. Powell and other Fed officials say they want to see how Trump's duties on imports will affect inflation and the broader economy. So far the duties have lifted costs of some goods such as appliances, furniture and toys and overall inflation has risen slightly although less than many economists had expected. There were some signs of splits in the Fed's ranks: governors Christopher Waller and Michelle Bowman voted to reduce borrowing costs while nine officials, including Powell, favoured standing pat. It is the first time in more than three decades that two of the seven Washington DC-based governors have dissented. One official, governor Adriana Kugler, was absent and did not vote. The choice to hold off on a rate cut will almost certainly result in further conflict between the Fed and White House, as Trump has repeatedly urged the central bank to reduce borrowing costs. The US Federal Reserve has left its key short-term interest rate unchanged for the fifth time this year, brushing off repeated calls from President Donald Trump for a cut. The Fed's decision on Wednesday leaves its key short-term rate at about 4.3 per cent, where it has stood after the US central bank reduced it three times last year. Chair Jerome Powell has said the Fed would likely have cut rates already if not for Trump's sweeping tariffs. Powell and other Fed officials say they want to see how Trump's duties on imports will affect inflation and the broader economy. So far the duties have lifted costs of some goods such as appliances, furniture and toys and overall inflation has risen slightly although less than many economists had expected. There were some signs of splits in the Fed's ranks: governors Christopher Waller and Michelle Bowman voted to reduce borrowing costs while nine officials, including Powell, favoured standing pat. It is the first time in more than three decades that two of the seven Washington DC-based governors have dissented. One official, governor Adriana Kugler, was absent and did not vote. The choice to hold off on a rate cut will almost certainly result in further conflict between the Fed and White House, as Trump has repeatedly urged the central bank to reduce borrowing costs. The US Federal Reserve has left its key short-term interest rate unchanged for the fifth time this year, brushing off repeated calls from President Donald Trump for a cut. The Fed's decision on Wednesday leaves its key short-term rate at about 4.3 per cent, where it has stood after the US central bank reduced it three times last year. Chair Jerome Powell has said the Fed would likely have cut rates already if not for Trump's sweeping tariffs. Powell and other Fed officials say they want to see how Trump's duties on imports will affect inflation and the broader economy. So far the duties have lifted costs of some goods such as appliances, furniture and toys and overall inflation has risen slightly although less than many economists had expected. There were some signs of splits in the Fed's ranks: governors Christopher Waller and Michelle Bowman voted to reduce borrowing costs while nine officials, including Powell, favoured standing pat. It is the first time in more than three decades that two of the seven Washington DC-based governors have dissented. One official, governor Adriana Kugler, was absent and did not vote. The choice to hold off on a rate cut will almost certainly result in further conflict between the Fed and White House, as Trump has repeatedly urged the central bank to reduce borrowing costs. The US Federal Reserve has left its key short-term interest rate unchanged for the fifth time this year, brushing off repeated calls from President Donald Trump for a cut. The Fed's decision on Wednesday leaves its key short-term rate at about 4.3 per cent, where it has stood after the US central bank reduced it three times last year. Chair Jerome Powell has said the Fed would likely have cut rates already if not for Trump's sweeping tariffs. Powell and other Fed officials say they want to see how Trump's duties on imports will affect inflation and the broader economy. So far the duties have lifted costs of some goods such as appliances, furniture and toys and overall inflation has risen slightly although less than many economists had expected. There were some signs of splits in the Fed's ranks: governors Christopher Waller and Michelle Bowman voted to reduce borrowing costs while nine officials, including Powell, favoured standing pat. It is the first time in more than three decades that two of the seven Washington DC-based governors have dissented. One official, governor Adriana Kugler, was absent and did not vote. The choice to hold off on a rate cut will almost certainly result in further conflict between the Fed and White House, as Trump has repeatedly urged the central bank to reduce borrowing costs.
Sydney Morning Herald
2 hours ago
- Sydney Morning Herald
Beware the hidden landmines in our credit card fees
Credit cards have been part of Australian life since the 1970s, offering convenience, though often at a cost. Over the decades, banks have profited handsomely from fees and interest charges that hit the most vulnerable the hardest. One infamous case involved a low-income customer who checked her balance at an ATM, saw $30, and withdrew it – only to be slugged a $2 inquiry fee that pushed her into the red. The result? A $30 penalty for overdrawing. It's a stark example of how small transactions can trigger outsized punishments in a system rigged against the poor. The mistreatment continues when penalty interest rates are often wildly out of step with the Reserve Bank's steadily falling cash rate. On overdue accounts, American Express charges 23.99 per cent, Latitude 27.99 per cent, and Virgin Money 20.74 per cent. These figures are not just high – they're psychologically engineered to appear more palatable. Pricing just under round numbers, a tactic long used in retail to mute the real cost, is now embedded in credit policy too. But whether it's $27.99 or 28 per cent, the pain to struggling cardholders is the same. Given the huge cost of being late with repayments, I've always made a habit of paying the balance the day the statement arrives, so there can be no arguments about when it was paid. This has worked well for many years. The credit card companies always send an email when the statement is available, and I've relied on those emails – never keeping a diary note – until now. Loading In June, I began receiving texts allegedly from Virgin, asking me to contact them about my credit card. I thought they were scams and ignored them – understandable, given the influx of bogus messages we receive these days. Then the June statement arrived with a big heading: 'Your account is overdue.' That came as a major shock – it's never happened before. There was also a narration: 'interest charged retail', $79.71. I considered calling Virgin to explain that I've always paid my card in full on time, and that I never received an email alerting me to the statement. But knowing how long the wait times can be, I decided it wasn't worth it. I paid the full balance that day. Then the next statement came – and that's when things really turned sour. Even though I'd paid the previous one immediately, I was hit with another debit: $19.05 for more interest. Assuming a mistake, I rang them to point out that I'd paid before the due date, so further interest made no sense. That's when the real kicker came. The woman on the phone said: 'Oh no, if you miss one payment, you then lose two interest-free periods.' In other words, even though I'd paid early, I was still going to be charged again.
The Age
2 hours ago
- The Age
Beware the hidden landmines in our credit card fees
Credit cards have been part of Australian life since the 1970s, offering convenience, though often at a cost. Over the decades, banks have profited handsomely from fees and interest charges that hit the most vulnerable the hardest. One infamous case involved a low-income customer who checked her balance at an ATM, saw $30, and withdrew it – only to be slugged a $2 inquiry fee that pushed her into the red. The result? A $30 penalty for overdrawing. It's a stark example of how small transactions can trigger outsized punishments in a system rigged against the poor. The mistreatment continues when penalty interest rates are often wildly out of step with the Reserve Bank's steadily falling cash rate. On overdue accounts, American Express charges 23.99 per cent, Latitude 27.99 per cent, and Virgin Money 20.74 per cent. These figures are not just high – they're psychologically engineered to appear more palatable. Pricing just under round numbers, a tactic long used in retail to mute the real cost, is now embedded in credit policy too. But whether it's $27.99 or 28 per cent, the pain to struggling cardholders is the same. Given the huge cost of being late with repayments, I've always made a habit of paying the balance the day the statement arrives, so there can be no arguments about when it was paid. This has worked well for many years. The credit card companies always send an email when the statement is available, and I've relied on those emails – never keeping a diary note – until now. Loading In June, I began receiving texts allegedly from Virgin, asking me to contact them about my credit card. I thought they were scams and ignored them – understandable, given the influx of bogus messages we receive these days. Then the June statement arrived with a big heading: 'Your account is overdue.' That came as a major shock – it's never happened before. There was also a narration: 'interest charged retail', $79.71. I considered calling Virgin to explain that I've always paid my card in full on time, and that I never received an email alerting me to the statement. But knowing how long the wait times can be, I decided it wasn't worth it. I paid the full balance that day. Then the next statement came – and that's when things really turned sour. Even though I'd paid the previous one immediately, I was hit with another debit: $19.05 for more interest. Assuming a mistake, I rang them to point out that I'd paid before the due date, so further interest made no sense. That's when the real kicker came. The woman on the phone said: 'Oh no, if you miss one payment, you then lose two interest-free periods.' In other words, even though I'd paid early, I was still going to be charged again.
