Acton vs Sprent
Property investment comparison - Acton, TAS 7320 vs Sprent, TAS 7315
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Acton wins 2, Sprent 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 | Acton | Sprent |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $480K | - |
| Median unit price | $490K | $515K |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 4.90% | 2.39% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | 3.99% | 4.57% |
| 1-year house growth | +21.6% | - |
| 3-year house growth | +30.3% | - |
| Vacancy rate | 2.0% | 0.4% |
| Population | 1,377 | 160 |
Acton vs Sprent: what the numbers say
For units, Acton sits at a median of $490K against $515K in Sprent, which makes Acton the more affordable unit market and Sprent the pricier one.
On cash flow, Acton leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 4.90%, compared with 2.39% in Sprent, a gap of 2.51 percentage points.
Rental vacancy is 0.4% in Sprent and 2.0% in Acton, so landlords in Sprent 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 160, roughly 9 times the size of Sprent; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Acton for rental income, Sprent 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