Abercrombie vs Broken Head
Property investment comparison - Abercrombie, NSW 2795 vs Broken Head, NSW 2481
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Abercrombie wins 3, Broken Head 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 | Abercrombie | Broken Head |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $860K | - |
| Median unit price | $455K | $1.3M |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 3.94% | 2.86% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | 5.22% | 4.61% |
| 1-year house growth | +8.7%estimate | - |
| 3-year house growth | - | - |
| Vacancy rate | 2.6% | 1.2% |
| Population | 1,127 | 385 |
Abercrombie vs Broken Head: what the numbers say
For units, Abercrombie sits at a median of $455K against $1.3M in Broken Head, which makes Abercrombie the more affordable unit market and Broken Head the pricier one.
On cash flow, Abercrombie leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 3.94%, compared with 2.86% in Broken Head, a gap of 1.08 percentage points.
Rental vacancy is 1.2% in Broken Head and 2.6% in Abercrombie, so landlords in Broken Head face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.
Abercrombie is the bigger suburb, with a population of 1,127 against 385, roughly 2.9 times the size of Broken Head; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Abercrombie for rental income, Broken Head 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