Abercrombie vs Splitters Creek
Property investment comparison - Abercrombie, NSW 2795 vs Splitters Creek, NSW 2640
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Abercrombie wins 0, Splitters Creek 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.
| Metric | Abercrombie | Splitters Creek |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $860K | - |
| Median unit price | $455K | $380K |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 3.94% | - |
| Gross rental yield (units) | 5.22% | - |
| 1-year house growth | +8.7%estimate | - |
| 3-year house growth | - | - |
| Vacancy rate | 2.6% | 1.8% |
| Population | 1,127 | 312 |
Abercrombie vs Splitters Creek: what the numbers say
For units, Abercrombie sits at a median of $455K against $380K in Splitters Creek, which makes Splitters Creek the more affordable unit market and Abercrombie the pricier one.
Rental vacancy is 1.8% in Splitters Creek and 2.6% in Abercrombie, so landlords in Splitters Creek 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 312, roughly 3.6 times the size of Splitters Creek; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Splitters Creek for the tighter rental market. Which matters more depends on whether the investor is buying for cash flow, capital growth or affordability.
Full profile
Splitters Creek, NSW 2640
Open Splitters Creek suburb profileRecent sales in Splitters Creek
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