Abercrombie vs Marmong Point
Property investment comparison - Abercrombie, NSW 2795 vs Marmong Point, NSW 2284
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Abercrombie wins 2, Marmong Point 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 | Marmong Point |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $860K | - |
| Median unit price | $455K | - |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 3.94% | 2.60% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | 5.22% | 4.92% |
| 1-year house growth | +8.7%estimate | - |
| 3-year house growth | - | - |
| Vacancy rate | 2.6% | 2.2% |
| Population | 1,127 | 765 |
Abercrombie vs Marmong Point: what the numbers say
On cash flow, Abercrombie leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 3.94%, compared with 2.60% in Marmong Point, a gap of 1.34 percentage points.
Rental vacancy is 2.2% in Marmong Point and 2.6% in Abercrombie, so landlords in Marmong Point face less competition for tenants.
Abercrombie is the bigger suburb, with a population of 1,127 against 765, larger than Marmong Point; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Abercrombie for rental income, Marmong 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
- 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