Aldinga vs Athelstone
Property investment comparison - Aldinga, SA 5173 vs Athelstone, SA 5076
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Aldinga wins 0, Athelstone wins 3. 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 | Aldinga | Athelstone |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | - | $1.1M |
| Median unit price | $675K | $630K |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 2.25% | 3.30% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | 4.50% | - |
| 1-year house growth | - | +14.1% |
| 3-year house growth | - | +41.1% |
| Vacancy rate | 1.5% | 0.5% |
| Population | 764 | 9,601 |
Aldinga vs Athelstone: what the numbers say
For units, Aldinga sits at a median of $675K against $630K in Athelstone, which makes Athelstone the more affordable unit market and Aldinga the pricier one.
On cash flow, Athelstone leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 3.30%, compared with 2.25% in Aldinga, a gap of 1.05 percentage points.
Rental vacancy is 0.5% in Athelstone and 1.5% in Aldinga, so landlords in Athelstone 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 764, roughly 13 times the size of Aldinga; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Athelstone for rental income, Athelstone 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