Aldgate vs Seacliff Park
Property investment comparison - Aldgate, SA 5154 vs Seacliff Park, SA 5049
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Aldgate wins 2, Seacliff Park 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 | Seacliff Park |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $1.6M | - |
| Median unit price | $535K | - |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 2.46% | - |
| Gross rental yield (units) | 6.39% | - |
| 1-year house growth | +6.8%estimate | +5.3% |
| 3-year house growth | - | +35.6% |
| Vacancy rate | 1.2% | 1.9% |
| Population | 3,471 | 2,644 |
Aldgate vs Seacliff Park: what the numbers say
Over the past year house prices moved +6.8% in Aldgate (an estimate) and +5.3% in Seacliff Park, so recent momentum favours Aldgate, although both suburbs recorded growth.
Rental vacancy is 1.2% in Aldgate and 1.9% in Seacliff 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 2,644, larger than Seacliff Park; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Aldgate 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
- 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