Skip to main content

Acacia Gardens vs Lower Mangrove

Property investment comparison - Acacia Gardens, NSW 2763 vs Lower Mangrove, NSW 2250

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Acacia Gardens wins 0, Lower Mangrove wins 3. 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.

MetricAcacia GardensLower Mangrove
Median house price$1.3M-
Median unit price-$610K
Gross rental yield (houses)3.10%3.17%
Gross rental yield (units)3.77%5.99%
1-year house growth-3.0%-
3-year house growth+2.8%-
Vacancy rate1.2%0.8%
Population3,66870

Acacia Gardens vs Lower Mangrove: what the numbers say

On cash flow, Lower Mangrove leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 3.17%, compared with 3.10% in Acacia Gardens, a gap of 0.07 percentage points.

Rental vacancy is 0.8% in Lower Mangrove and 1.2% in Acacia Gardens, so landlords in Lower Mangrove face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.

Acacia Gardens is the bigger suburb, with a population of 3,668 against 70, roughly 52 times the size of Lower Mangrove; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Lower Mangrove for rental income, Lower Mangrove 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