Skip to main content

Acacia Hills vs Downlands

Property investment comparison - Acacia Hills, TAS 7306 vs Downlands, TAS 7320

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Acacia Hills wins 2, Downlands 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 HillsDownlands
Median house price$800K-
Median unit price$420K$430K
Gross rental yield (houses)2.96%3.20%
Gross rental yield (units)4.48%4.56%
1-year house growth+7.6%+11.1%
3-year house growth-+41.4%
Vacancy rate0.8%3.0%
Population729237

Acacia Hills vs Downlands: what the numbers say

For units, Acacia Hills sits at a median of $420K against $430K in Downlands, which makes Acacia Hills the more affordable unit market and Downlands the pricier one.

On cash flow, Downlands leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 3.20%, compared with 2.96% in Acacia Hills, a gap of 0.24 percentage points.

Over the past year house prices moved +7.6% in Acacia Hills and +11.1% in Downlands, so recent momentum favours Downlands, although both suburbs recorded growth.

Rental vacancy is 0.8% in Acacia Hills and 3.0% in Downlands, so landlords in Acacia Hills face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.

Acacia Hills is the bigger suburb, with a population of 729 against 237, roughly 3.1 times the size of Downlands; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Downlands for rental income, Downlands for recent price momentum, Acacia Hills 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