The honest answer to "Should I buy property or stocks?" is that neither has consistently beaten the other. The gap between the two keeps closing and reopening.
In 2025, S&P/ASX 200 Index (ASX: XJO) shares delivered a total return of 10.32%, including dividends, while the national median home value rose 8.6%, or 12.4%, including rental income, putting property ahead for the year.
The year before that, shares had the edge.
Rather than chase the asset class that has performed best recently, it is worth understanding the differences that actually drive these decisions.
Image source: Getty Images
Cost and access matter before returns do
The most overlooked difference between property and stocks is what it takes to get started.
A residential property typically requires a deposit in the tens of thousands of dollars, takes weeks to settle, and involves ongoing costs, including rates, maintenance, insurance, and potentially a property manager.
On the contrary, the Betashares Australia 200 ETF (ASX: A200) can be bought for a few hundred dollars in a single trade, with a management fee of just 0.04% per annum, no stamp duty, and no ongoing maintenance bill.
That gap in entry cost and flexibility is one reason younger or lower-capital investors often start with shares even if they ultimately want to own property as well.
Leverage cuts both ways
Property's biggest structural advantage is leverage.
A 20% deposit on an investment property gives an investor exposure to the full value of that asset. This means that a 10% rise in the property's value can represent a 50% return on the deposit before costs.
That same leverage means a fall in home values is similarly magnified. Unlike shares, a property cannot be partially sold to reduce risk or raise cash quickly if circumstances change.
Banks will also lend far more readily, and at lower rates, against residential property than against a portfolio of individual shares.
This is part of why property has historically been the more common path to using borrowed money to build wealth in Australia.
Liquidity and diversification favour stocks over property
Shares can be bought or sold within seconds during market hours. A single ETF purchase can spread exposure across hundreds of companies and sectors in one transaction.
Property is illiquid by comparison, with a typical sale taking weeks to settle and carrying meaningful transaction costs, including agent fees and stamp duty on the way back in for a subsequent purchase.
For investors who want exposure to property without the illiquidity, Goodman Group (ASX: GMG) offers an interesting middle ground. The company provides linked returns through a listed structure that can be bought and sold like any other share.
A direct comparison through one company
It is also worth knowing that ASX shares can give investors indirect exposure to the property market itself.
REA Group Ltd (ASX: REA), which operates realestate.com.au, earns its revenue from the volume and value of property listings rather than from owning property directly.
That makes REA a way to benefit from a strong property market without taking on a mortgage, though its earnings can also soften if listing volumes fall during a weaker housing cycle.
Tax treatment is broadly similar, with one key difference
Both property and shares are subject to capital gains tax, with primary residences exempt for homeowners.
Australian shares carry one advantage that property does not: franking credits.
Dividends from companies such as Commonwealth Bank of Australia (ASX: CBA) that pay fully-franked dividends are eligible for a tax credit. This can meaningfully boost after-tax returns, particularly for investors in lower tax brackets or those holding shares inside superannuation.
Property investors instead rely on negative gearing and the capital gains discount. These tools work differently and depend heavily on an individual's income and borrowing structure.
Foolish Takeaway for the property vs. stocks decision
Property and shares have each outperformed the other in different recent years, which is the clearest sign that neither is reliably "better" in isolation.
The more useful question is which asset class best fits an individual investor's capital, time horizon, appetite for leverage, and liquidity needs.
For many Australians, the honest answer is not property or stocks, but some combination of both.
