Skip to main content

Abercrombie vs Tacoma

Property investment comparison - Abercrombie, NSW 2795 vs Tacoma, NSW 2259

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Abercrombie wins 4, Tacoma 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.

MetricAbercrombieTacoma
Median house price$860K-
Median unit price$455K$580K
Gross rental yield (houses)3.94%2.28%
Gross rental yield (units)5.22%5.14%
1-year house growth+8.7%estimate+6.2%
3-year house growth-+19.2%
Vacancy rate2.6%2.3%
Population1,127615

Abercrombie vs Tacoma: what the numbers say

For units, Abercrombie sits at a median of $455K against $580K in Tacoma, which makes Abercrombie the more affordable unit market and Tacoma the pricier one.

On cash flow, Abercrombie leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 3.94%, compared with 2.28% in Tacoma, a gap of 1.66 percentage points.

Over the past year house prices moved +8.7% in Abercrombie (an estimate) and +6.2% in Tacoma, so recent momentum favours Abercrombie, although both suburbs recorded growth.

Rental vacancy is 2.3% in Tacoma and 2.6% in Abercrombie, so landlords in Tacoma face less competition for tenants.

Abercrombie is the bigger suburb, with a population of 1,127 against 615, larger than Tacoma; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

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