What is the cost of concrete vs wooden fence posts?

The post is the part of a fence that decides how long the whole thing stands up. Comparing concrete and timber means weighing a higher up-front cost against a longer life — not just the price on the merchant's shelf.

Up-front cost and fitting compared

On the day of the job, wooden posts are the lower-cost option to buy and the easier to handle:

• Purchase price: a treated softwood post is usually lower-cost than a concrete one of the same height.
• Weight and handling: concrete posts are heavy, sometimes needing two people, which can add a little labour time.
• Fitting: both are set in postcrete to a similar depth, so the groundwork is broadly comparable; the main difference is handling the heavier concrete.
• Slotted concrete posts: these have grooves that panels drop straight into, which can speed future panel changes.

So if the only consideration were the first invoice, timber wins. The picture changes once you account for how long each lasts.

Indicative comparison for guidance only. Actual prices and lifespans vary with timber grade, exposure and ground conditions.

Lifespan: where concrete pulls ahead

The decisive difference is durability. A timber post sits with its base in damp soil, and over time that buried section softens and rots, usually at ground level where wet and air meet:

• Wooden posts commonly last in the region of 10 to 15 years before the base weakens, though good treatment, a gravel board and dry ground extend that.
• Concrete posts do not rot and can stand for 25 years or more, often outlasting the panels they carry.
• Failure mode: when a timber post goes, the fence leans or blows over in a storm, and replacing a concreted-in post is heavy work. Concrete posts rarely fail this way.

Because the post is the most labour-intensive part to replace, a post that lasts decades saves not just material cost but the repeated groundwork of digging out and re-setting failed timber.

Total cost over the life of the fence

Comparing posts on up-front price alone is misleading. The fairer measure is cost over, say, 25 years:

• Timber route: lower initial cost, but you may replace posts once or twice over that period, each time paying for the post plus the labour to dig out the old footing — the most expensive repair on a fence.
• Concrete route: higher initial cost, but the posts likely last the whole period, so you only ever renew panels, which slot in without disturbing the footings.
• Hybrid (common choice): concrete posts and gravel boards with timber panels gives a rot-free base, a traditional look, and easy panel changes.

For a fence you intend to keep for the long term, the higher up-front spend on concrete posts is usually the lower total cost. For a short-term fence, a temporary boundary, or where you specifically want an all-timber appearance, treated wooden posts can still be the sensible choice.

Installation cost differences between the two

The posts themselves are only part of the story — fitting them differs in ways that affect the total:

• Weight and handling: a concrete post is heavy, often a two-person lift, which can mean a little more labour to manoeuvre and set, especially with tight access.
• Footing depth: both need a proper concreted footing, but the heavier concrete post and the panels it carries reward a deeper, well-braced hole, which uses more postcrete.
• Slotted fitting: concrete posts hold panels in slots with no screws into the post, which is quick once set; timber posts are usually fixed with brackets or clout nails, adding a few fixings per bay.
• Future swaps: the slotted concrete system makes the next panel change a lift-out-lift-in job, whereas unscrewing weathered fixings from timber posts is slower.

In practice the fitting labour is broadly similar for a new run either way, with concrete's slight handling penalty offset by faster panel fixing. The bigger cost difference shows up later, when a rotten timber post has to be dug out and reset — a job concrete posts simply avoid.

When wooden posts still make sense

Concrete is not automatically the right answer for every situation. Wooden posts remain a reasonable choice when:

• Appearance is the priority: an all-timber fence with matching wooden posts has a softer, more natural look that some gardens suit better.
• The fence is temporary: a boundary you expect to move or change soon does not justify the extra concrete cost.
• Access is very tight: heavy concrete posts are awkward to carry through a house or down a narrow path.
• Budget is the constraint now: if the up-front figure has to be kept down, treated timber with a concrete gravel board to protect the panel base is a pragmatic compromise.

The honest summary is that wooden posts win on day-one cost and looks, while concrete posts win on lifespan and long-run value. Many UK installers default to concrete posts with timber panels because it captures most of the durability benefit while keeping the familiar timber appearance above ground.

Frequently asked questions

Sources & further reading

• Checkatrade — fence post cost guide
• MyJobQuote — concrete vs timber fence posts
• HouseholdQuotes — fencing cost guide

Figures on this page are typical UK ranges drawn from published sources and depend on your specific garden. They are guidance, not a quotation.