Abbotsbury vs Limekilns
Property investment comparison - Abbotsbury, NSW 2176 vs Limekilns, NSW 2795
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Abbotsbury wins 1, Limekilns wins 3. 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 | Limekilns |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $1.8M | - |
| Median unit price | $770K | $455K |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 2.81% | 2.68% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | 4.36% | 5.49% |
| 1-year house growth | +10.8% | - |
| 3-year house growth | +22.3% | - |
| Vacancy rate | 5.2% | 0.7% |
| Population | 4,200 | 115 |
Abbotsbury vs Limekilns: what the numbers say
For units, Abbotsbury sits at a median of $770K against $455K in Limekilns, which makes Limekilns 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 2.68% in Limekilns, a gap of 0.13 percentage points.
Rental vacancy is 0.7% in Limekilns and 5.2% in Abbotsbury, so landlords in Limekilns face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.
Abbotsbury is the bigger suburb, with a population of 4,200 against 115, roughly 37 times the size of Limekilns; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Abbotsbury for rental income, Limekilns 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