Acton vs Penna
Property investment comparison - Acton, TAS 7320 vs Penna, TAS 7171
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Acton wins 3, Penna 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.
| Metric | Acton | Penna |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $480K | - |
| Median unit price | $490K | $530K |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 4.90% | 3.47% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | 3.99% | 4.55% |
| 1-year house growth | +21.6% | - |
| 3-year house growth | +30.3% | - |
| Vacancy rate | 2.0% | 5.4% |
| Population | 1,377 | 437 |
Acton vs Penna: what the numbers say
For units, Acton sits at a median of $490K against $530K in Penna, which makes Acton the more affordable unit market and Penna the pricier one.
On cash flow, Acton leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 4.90%, compared with 3.47% in Penna, a gap of 1.43 percentage points.
Rental vacancy is 2.0% in Acton and 5.4% in Penna, so landlords in Acton face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.
Acton is the bigger suburb, with a population of 1,377 against 437, roughly 3.2 times the size of Penna; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Acton for rental income, Acton 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