Skip to main content

Acacia Hills vs Golden Valley

Property investment comparison - Acacia Hills, TAS 7306 vs Golden Valley, TAS 7304

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Acacia Hills wins 1, Golden Valley 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 HillsGolden Valley
Median house price$800K-
Median unit price$420K$505K
Gross rental yield (houses)2.96%-
Gross rental yield (units)4.48%5.33%
1-year house growth+7.6%+9.9%
3-year house growth-+6.7%
Vacancy rate0.8%0.8%
Population729226

Acacia Hills vs Golden Valley: what the numbers say

For units, Acacia Hills sits at a median of $420K against $505K in Golden Valley, which makes Acacia Hills the more affordable unit market and Golden Valley the pricier one.

Over the past year house prices moved +7.6% in Acacia Hills and +9.9% in Golden Valley, so recent momentum favours Golden Valley, although both suburbs recorded growth.

Rental vacancy is 0.8% in Golden Valley and 0.8% in Acacia Hills, so landlords in Golden Valley 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 226, roughly 3.2 times the size of Golden Valley; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Golden Valley for recent price momentum, Golden Valley 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