Abercrombie vs Falls Creek
Property investment comparison - Abercrombie, NSW 2795 vs Falls Creek, NSW 2540
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Abercrombie wins 5, Falls Creek wins 0. 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 | Falls Creek |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $860K | - |
| Median unit price | $455K | $630K |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 3.94% | 2.65% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | 5.22% | 4.33% |
| 1-year house growth | +8.7%estimate | +2.6% |
| 3-year house growth | - | +10.2% |
| Vacancy rate | 2.6% | 2.6% |
| Population | 1,127 | 939 |
Abercrombie vs Falls Creek: what the numbers say
For units, Abercrombie sits at a median of $455K against $630K in Falls Creek, which makes Abercrombie the more affordable unit market and Falls Creek the pricier one.
On cash flow, Abercrombie leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 3.94%, compared with 2.65% in Falls Creek, a gap of 1.29 percentage points.
Over the past year house prices moved +8.7% in Abercrombie (an estimate) and +2.6% in Falls Creek, so recent momentum favours Abercrombie, although both suburbs recorded growth.
Rental vacancy is the same in both, at 2.6%.
Abercrombie is the bigger suburb, with a population of 1,127 against 939, larger than Falls Creek; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Abercrombie for rental income, Abercrombie for recent price momentum. 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