Aberdeen vs Fishing Point
Property investment comparison - Aberdeen, NSW 2336 vs Fishing Point, NSW 2283
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Aberdeen wins 0, Fishing Point 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 | Aberdeen | Fishing Point |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $620K | - |
| Median unit price | - | $600K |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 4.85% | - |
| Gross rental yield (units) | - | 5.18% |
| 1-year house growth | +9.5% | +10.5%estimate |
| 3-year house growth | +48.1% | - |
| Vacancy rate | 1.9% | 1.4% |
| Population | 2,051 | 1,105 |
Aberdeen vs Fishing Point: what the numbers say
Over the past year house prices moved +9.5% in Aberdeen and +10.5% in Fishing Point (an estimate), so recent momentum favours Fishing Point, although both suburbs recorded growth.
Rental vacancy is 1.4% in Fishing Point and 1.9% in Aberdeen, so landlords in Fishing Point 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 1,105, larger than Fishing Point; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Fishing Point for recent price momentum, Fishing Point for the tighter rental market. Which matters more depends on whether the investor is buying for cash flow, capital growth or affordability.
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