Cubba vs Noona
Cubba skews owner-occupied (125%), Noona runs more rental-dense (90% owner).
Buying in Cubba or Noona?
The free buying guide: what you can really spend, the schemes and stamp duty in your state, inspecting, and making the offer.
Get the free buying guideSelling in Cubba? The free selling guide
Cubba and Noona side by side
| Measure | Cubba | Noona |
|---|---|---|
| Renting | ||
| House rent | $380/wk | $380/wk |
| Owner occupied | 125.0% | 90.0% |
| Schools | ||
| Schools nearby | 0 | 0 |
| Lifestyle and people | ||
| Walk score | 0 | 0 |
| Transit score | 0 | 0 |
| Bike score | 0 | 0 |
| Population | 26 | 21 |
| Median age | 44 | 53 |
| Climate | ||
| Annual rainfall | 342 mm | 300 mm |
| Mean max, January | 35.8°C | 36.2°C |
Green dot: better on that measure (lower price, higher growth, higher walkability, lower risk). Each suburb’s profile gives the source and period of its figures.
Which suits whom
- For buyers
- We don't yet have verified suburb-level medians for one or both of these suburbs. Check the individual profiles for the data we do publish, and the methodology page for how we source it.
- For investors
- Rental or growth data is incomplete for one or both suburbs. Look at the full investor view on each suburb profile for a complete picture.
- For families
- Cubba has a heavier family-household mix (113% vs 40%), which typically signals stronger demand for family-amenable infrastructure (parks, schools, supermarkets).
Keep comparing
The two suburbs
Compare Cubba with
Compare Noona with
Choosing between Cubba and Noona?
The free buying guide: budget, schemes, inspections and how not to overpay.