Allenby Gardens vs Mount Jagged
Property investment comparison - Allenby Gardens, SA 5009 vs Mount Jagged, SA 5211
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Allenby Gardens wins 2, Mount Jagged 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 | Allenby Gardens | Mount Jagged |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $1.2M | - |
| Median unit price | $920K | - |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 3.28% | 2.70% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | - | - |
| 1-year house growth | +8.0% | - |
| 3-year house growth | +33.1% | - |
| Vacancy rate | 0.3% | 2.4% |
| Population | 2,045 | 155 |
Allenby Gardens vs Mount Jagged: what the numbers say
On cash flow, Allenby Gardens leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 3.28%, compared with 2.70% in Mount Jagged, a gap of 0.58 percentage points.
Rental vacancy is 0.3% in Allenby Gardens and 2.4% in Mount Jagged, so landlords in Allenby Gardens face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.
Allenby Gardens is the bigger suburb, with a population of 2,045 against 155, roughly 13 times the size of Mount Jagged; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Allenby Gardens for rental income, Allenby Gardens for the tighter rental market. Which matters more depends on whether the investor is buying for cash flow, capital growth or affordability.
Full profile
Allenby Gardens, SA 5009
Open Allenby Gardens suburb profileRecent sales in Allenby Gardens
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