Abels Bay vs Acacia Hills
Property investment comparison - Abels Bay, TAS 7112 vs Acacia Hills, TAS 7306
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Abels Bay wins 0, Acacia Hills wins 1. 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 | Abels Bay | Acacia Hills |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | - | $800K |
| Median unit price | - | $420K |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | - | 2.96% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | - | 4.48% |
| 1-year house growth | - | +7.6% |
| 3-year house growth | - | - |
| Vacancy rate | 3.2% | 0.8% |
| Population | 127 | 729 |
Abels Bay vs Acacia Hills: what the numbers say
Rental vacancy is 0.8% in Acacia Hills and 3.2% in Abels Bay, so landlords in Acacia Hills face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.
Acacia Hills is the bigger suburb, with a population of 729 against 127, roughly 6 times the size of Abels Bay; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Acacia Hills 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