Skip to main content

Abbotsbury vs Table Top

Property investment comparison - Abbotsbury, NSW 2176 vs Table Top, NSW 2640

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Abbotsbury wins 1, Table Top wins 4. 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.

MetricAbbotsburyTable Top
Median house price$1.8M-
Median unit price$770K$385K
Gross rental yield (houses)2.81%2.10%
Gross rental yield (units)4.36%5.32%
1-year house growth+10.8%+16.7%estimate
3-year house growth+22.3%-
Vacancy rate5.2%3.5%
Population4,2001,516

Abbotsbury vs Table Top: what the numbers say

For units, Abbotsbury sits at a median of $770K against $385K in Table Top, which makes Table Top 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 2.10% in Table Top, a gap of 0.71 percentage points.

Over the past year house prices moved +10.8% in Abbotsbury and +16.7% in Table Top (an estimate), so recent momentum favours Table Top, although both suburbs recorded growth.

Rental vacancy is 3.5% in Table Top and 5.2% in Abbotsbury, so landlords in Table Top face less competition for tenants.

Abbotsbury is the bigger suburb, with a population of 4,200 against 1,516, roughly 2.8 times the size of Table Top; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Abbotsbury for rental income, Table Top for recent price momentum, Table Top for the tighter rental market. Which matters more depends on whether the investor is buying for cash flow, capital growth or affordability.

Keep exploring

Compare any 2-4 Australian suburbs

Build your own multi-suburb comparison with the full interactive tool.

Open interactive comparison