Abbotsbury vs Bungonia
Property investment comparison - Abbotsbury, NSW 2176 vs Bungonia, NSW 2580
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Abbotsbury wins 2, Bungonia 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 | Abbotsbury | Bungonia |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $1.8M | - |
| Median unit price | $770K | $555K |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 2.81% | 2.16% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | 4.36% | 4.31% |
| 1-year house growth | +10.8% | - |
| 3-year house growth | +22.3% | - |
| Vacancy rate | 5.2% | 2.7% |
| Population | 4,200 | 469 |
Abbotsbury vs Bungonia: what the numbers say
For units, Abbotsbury sits at a median of $770K against $555K in Bungonia, which makes Bungonia the more affordable unit market and Abbotsbury the pricier one.
On cash flow, Abbotsbury leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 2.81%, compared with 2.16% in Bungonia, a gap of 0.65 percentage points.
Rental vacancy is 2.7% in Bungonia and 5.2% in Abbotsbury, so landlords in Bungonia face less competition for tenants.
Abbotsbury is the bigger suburb, with a population of 4,200 against 469, roughly 9 times the size of Bungonia; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Abbotsbury for rental income, Bungonia 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