Skip to main content

Abercrombie vs Fishing Point

Property investment comparison - Abercrombie, NSW 2795 vs Fishing Point, NSW 2283

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Abercrombie wins 2, Fishing Point wins 2. 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.

MetricAbercrombieFishing Point
Median house price$860K-
Median unit price$455K$600K
Gross rental yield (houses)3.94%-
Gross rental yield (units)5.22%5.18%
1-year house growth+8.7%estimate+10.5%estimate
3-year house growth--
Vacancy rate2.6%1.4%
Population1,1271,105

Abercrombie vs Fishing Point: what the numbers say

For units, Abercrombie sits at a median of $455K against $600K in Fishing Point, which makes Abercrombie the more affordable unit market and Fishing Point the pricier one.

Over the past year house prices moved +8.7% in Abercrombie (an estimate) and +10.5% in Fishing Point (an estimate), so recent momentum favours Fishing Point, although both suburbs recorded growth.

Rental vacancy is 1.4% in Fishing Point and 2.6% in Abercrombie, so landlords in Fishing Point 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 1,105, larger than Fishing Point; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Fishing Point for recent price momentum, Fishing Point 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