Albert Park vs Athelstone
Property investment comparison - Albert Park, SA 5014 vs Athelstone, SA 5076
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Albert Park wins 1, Athelstone wins 0. 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 | Albert Park | Athelstone |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | - | $1.1M |
| Median unit price | - | $630K |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | - | 3.30% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | 4.15% | - |
| 1-year house growth | - | +14.1% |
| 3-year house growth | - | +41.1% |
| Vacancy rate | 0.3% | 0.5% |
| Population | 1,780 | 9,601 |
Albert Park vs Athelstone: what the numbers say
Rental vacancy is 0.3% in Albert Park and 0.5% in Athelstone, so landlords in Albert Park face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.
Athelstone is the bigger suburb, with a population of 9,601 against 1,780, roughly 5 times the size of Albert Park; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Albert Park 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