Skip to main content

Aberdeen vs Cundletown

Property investment comparison - Aberdeen, NSW 2336 vs Cundletown, NSW 2430

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Aberdeen wins 2, Cundletown 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.

MetricAberdeenCundletown
Median house price$620K$620K
Median unit price-$400K
Gross rental yield (houses)4.85%4.53%
Gross rental yield (units)-5.10%
1-year house growth+9.5%+7.7%estimate
3-year house growth+48.1%-
Vacancy rate1.9%0.8%
Population2,0512,050

Aberdeen vs Cundletown: what the numbers say

Houses cost about the same in both suburbs: the median house price is $620K in Aberdeen and $620K in Cundletown.

On cash flow, Aberdeen leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 4.85%, compared with 4.53% in Cundletown, a gap of 0.32 percentage points.

Over the past year house prices moved +9.5% in Aberdeen and +7.7% in Cundletown (an estimate), so recent momentum favours Aberdeen, although both suburbs recorded growth.

Rental vacancy is 0.8% in Cundletown and 1.9% in Aberdeen, so landlords in Cundletown face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.

Aberdeen is the bigger suburb, with a population of 2,051 against 2,050, larger than Cundletown; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Aberdeen for rental income, Aberdeen for recent price momentum, Cundletown 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