Skip to main content

Aberdeen vs Beverley Park

Property investment comparison - Aberdeen, NSW 2336 vs Beverley Park, NSW 2217

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Aberdeen wins 3, Beverley Park 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.

MetricAberdeenBeverley Park
Median house price$620K-
Median unit price-$910K
Gross rental yield (houses)4.85%2.38%
Gross rental yield (units)--
1-year house growth+9.5%+5.6%
3-year house growth+48.1%+11.5%
Vacancy rate1.9%1.2%
Population2,0512,646

Aberdeen vs Beverley Park: what the numbers say

On cash flow, Aberdeen leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 4.85%, compared with 2.38% in Beverley Park, a gap of 2.47 percentage points.

Over the past year house prices moved +9.5% in Aberdeen and +5.6% in Beverley Park, so recent momentum favours Aberdeen, although both suburbs recorded growth.

Looking back three years, Aberdeen houses are +48.1% and Beverley Park houses +11.5%, so Aberdeen has compounded faster than Beverley Park over the longer window.

Rental vacancy is 1.2% in Beverley Park and 1.9% in Aberdeen, so landlords in Beverley Park face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.

Beverley Park is the bigger suburb, with a population of 2,646 against 2,051, larger than Aberdeen; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Aberdeen for rental income, Aberdeen for recent price momentum, Beverley Park 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