Skip to main content

Abercrombie vs Daceyville

Property investment comparison - Abercrombie, NSW 2795 vs Daceyville, NSW 2032

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Abercrombie wins 3, Daceyville 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.

MetricAbercrombieDaceyville
Median house price$860K-
Median unit price$455K$920K
Gross rental yield (houses)3.94%2.82%
Gross rental yield (units)5.22%-
1-year house growth+8.7%estimate-3.8%
3-year house growth--
Vacancy rate2.6%2.5%
Population1,1271,146

Abercrombie vs Daceyville: what the numbers say

For units, Abercrombie sits at a median of $455K against $920K in Daceyville, which makes Abercrombie the more affordable unit market and Daceyville the pricier one.

On cash flow, Abercrombie leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 3.94%, compared with 2.82% in Daceyville, a gap of 1.12 percentage points.

Over the past year house prices moved +8.7% in Abercrombie (an estimate) and -3.8% in Daceyville, so recent momentum favours Abercrombie, while Daceyville went backwards.

Rental vacancy is 2.5% in Daceyville and 2.6% in Abercrombie, so landlords in Daceyville face less competition for tenants.

Daceyville is the bigger suburb, with a population of 1,146 against 1,127, larger than Abercrombie; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Abercrombie for rental income, Abercrombie for recent price momentum, Daceyville 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