Skip to main content

Aldgate vs Macdonald Park

Property investment comparison - Aldgate, SA 5154 vs Macdonald Park, SA 5121

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Aldgate wins 4, Macdonald Park 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.

MetricAldgateMacdonald Park
Median house price$1.6M-
Median unit price$535K$680K
Gross rental yield (houses)2.46%1.58%
Gross rental yield (units)6.39%3.92%
1-year house growth+6.8%estimate+9.0%
3-year house growth-+34.0%
Vacancy rate1.2%7.7%
Population3,471503

Aldgate vs Macdonald Park: what the numbers say

For units, Aldgate sits at a median of $535K against $680K in Macdonald Park, which makes Aldgate the more affordable unit market and Macdonald Park the pricier one.

On cash flow, Aldgate leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 2.46%, compared with 1.58% in Macdonald Park, a gap of 0.88 percentage points.

Over the past year house prices moved +6.8% in Aldgate (an estimate) and +9.0% in Macdonald Park, so recent momentum favours Macdonald Park, although both suburbs recorded growth.

Rental vacancy is 1.2% in Aldgate and 7.7% in Macdonald Park, so landlords in Aldgate face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.

Aldgate is the bigger suburb, with a population of 3,471 against 503, roughly 7 times the size of Macdonald Park; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Aldgate for rental income, Macdonald Park for recent price momentum, Aldgate 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