Abbey vs Port Albany
Property investment comparison - Abbey, WA 6280 vs Port Albany, WA 6330
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Abbey wins 1, Port Albany wins 2. The better choice depends on whether you're optimising for cash flow, growth, affordability, or liquidity, the table below highlights the winner on each metric.
| Metric | Abbey | Port Albany |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $1.8M | - |
| Median unit price | - | $570K |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 2.30% | 1.76% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | 4.14% | 5.70% |
| 1-year house growth | +21.8%estimate | - |
| 3-year house growth | - | - |
| Vacancy rate | 0.6% | 0.3% |
| Population | 1,321 | 133 |
Abbey vs Port Albany: what the numbers say
On cash flow, Abbey leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 2.30%, compared with 1.76% in Port Albany, a gap of 0.54 percentage points.
Rental vacancy is 0.3% in Port Albany and 0.6% in Abbey, so landlords in Port Albany face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.
Abbey is the bigger suburb, with a population of 1,321 against 133, roughly 10 times the size of Port Albany; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Abbey for rental income, Port Albany for the tighter rental market. Which matters more depends on whether the investor is buying for cash flow, capital growth or affordability.
Keep exploring
- National investment guide - top suburbs across every metric
- Take the suburb finder quiz - 5 questions to match your goals
- How our investment score works
- Property investment glossary - every term defined
Compare any 2-4 Australian suburbs
Build your own multi-suburb comparison with the full interactive tool.
Open interactive comparison