Addington vs Aintree
Property investment comparison - Addington, VIC 3352 vs Aintree, VIC 3336
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Addington wins 1, Aintree 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 | Addington | Aintree |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | - | $705K |
| Median unit price | - | $575K |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 3.55% | 3.98% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | - | 2.49% |
| 1-year house growth | - | +1.1% |
| 3-year house growth | - | -3.9% |
| Vacancy rate | 1.8% | 14.5% |
| Population | 65 | 7,982 |
Addington vs Aintree: what the numbers say
On cash flow, Aintree leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 3.98%, compared with 3.55% in Addington, a gap of 0.43 percentage points.
Rental vacancy is 1.8% in Addington and 14.5% in Aintree, so landlords in Addington face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.
Aintree is the bigger suburb, with a population of 7,982 against 65, roughly 123 times the size of Addington; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Aintree for rental income, Addington 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