Skip to main content

Abercrombie vs Mulbring

Property investment comparison - Abercrombie, NSW 2795 vs Mulbring, NSW 2323

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

MetricAbercrombieMulbring
Median house price$860K-
Median unit price$455K$530K
Gross rental yield (houses)3.94%1.62%
Gross rental yield (units)5.22%5.58%
1-year house growth+8.7%estimate+22.6%
3-year house growth-+29.1%
Vacancy rate2.6%5.0%
Population1,127682

Abercrombie vs Mulbring: what the numbers say

For units, Abercrombie sits at a median of $455K against $530K in Mulbring, which makes Abercrombie the more affordable unit market and Mulbring the pricier one.

On cash flow, Abercrombie leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 3.94%, compared with 1.62% in Mulbring, a gap of 2.32 percentage points.

Over the past year house prices moved +8.7% in Abercrombie (an estimate) and +22.6% in Mulbring, so recent momentum favours Mulbring, although both suburbs recorded growth.

Rental vacancy is 2.6% in Abercrombie and 5.0% in Mulbring, so landlords in Abercrombie face less competition for tenants.

Abercrombie is the bigger suburb, with a population of 1,127 against 682, larger than Mulbring; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

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