Aldgate vs Pallamana
Property investment comparison - Aldgate, SA 5154 vs Pallamana, SA 5254
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Aldgate wins 2, Pallamana 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 | Aldgate | Pallamana |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $1.6M | - |
| Median unit price | $535K | - |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 2.46% | 1.82% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | 6.39% | - |
| 1-year house growth | +6.8%estimate | - |
| 3-year house growth | - | - |
| Vacancy rate | 1.2% | 9.2% |
| Population | 3,471 | 68 |
Aldgate vs Pallamana: what the numbers say
On cash flow, Aldgate leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 2.46%, compared with 1.82% in Pallamana, a gap of 0.64 percentage points.
Rental vacancy is 1.2% in Aldgate and 9.2% in Pallamana, 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 68, roughly 51 times the size of Pallamana; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Aldgate for rental income, 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
- 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