Abbotsbury vs Long Flat
Property investment comparison - Abbotsbury, NSW 2176 vs Long Flat, NSW 2446
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Abbotsbury wins 1, Long Flat 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 | Long Flat |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $1.8M | - |
| Median unit price | $770K | $510K |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 2.81% | 2.00% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | 4.36% | 4.94% |
| 1-year house growth | +10.8% | - |
| 3-year house growth | +22.3% | - |
| Vacancy rate | 5.2% | 1.3% |
| Population | 4,200 | 112 |
Abbotsbury vs Long Flat: what the numbers say
For units, Abbotsbury sits at a median of $770K against $510K in Long Flat, which makes Long Flat 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 2.00% in Long Flat, a gap of 0.81 percentage points.
Rental vacancy is 1.3% in Long Flat and 5.2% in Abbotsbury, so landlords in Long Flat 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 112, roughly 38 times the size of Long Flat; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Abbotsbury for rental income, Long Flat 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