Aldgate vs Marden
Property investment comparison - Aldgate, SA 5154 vs Marden, SA 5070
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Aldgate wins 3, Marden 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 | Aldgate | Marden |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $1.6M | - |
| Median unit price | $535K | $640K |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 2.46% | 2.75% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | 6.39% | 4.00% |
| 1-year house growth | +6.8%estimate | +12.6% |
| 3-year house growth | - | +80.0% |
| Vacancy rate | 1.2% | 1.2% |
| Population | 3,471 | 2,645 |
Aldgate vs Marden: what the numbers say
For units, Aldgate sits at a median of $535K against $640K in Marden, which makes Aldgate the more affordable unit market and Marden the pricier one.
On cash flow, Marden leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 2.75%, compared with 2.46% in Aldgate, a gap of 0.29 percentage points.
Over the past year house prices moved +6.8% in Aldgate (an estimate) and +12.6% in Marden, so recent momentum favours Marden, although both suburbs recorded growth.
Rental vacancy is the same in both, at 1.2%.
Aldgate is the bigger suburb, with a population of 3,471 against 2,645, larger than Marden; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Marden for rental income, Marden for recent price momentum. 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