Skip to main content

Allenby Gardens vs Pasadena

Property investment comparison - Allenby Gardens, SA 5009 vs Pasadena, SA 5042

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Allenby Gardens wins 3, Pasadena wins 1. 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.

MetricAllenby GardensPasadena
Median house price$1.2M$1.2M
Median unit price$920K-
Gross rental yield (houses)3.28%3.10%
Gross rental yield (units)-4.67%
1-year house growth+8.0%+12.2%estimate
3-year house growth+33.1%-
Vacancy rate0.3%0.5%
Population2,0453,073

Allenby Gardens vs Pasadena: what the numbers say

The median house price is $1.2M in Allenby Gardens and $1.2M in Pasadena, so Allenby Gardens is the cheaper entry point.

On cash flow, Allenby Gardens leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 3.28%, compared with 3.10% in Pasadena, a gap of 0.18 percentage points.

Over the past year house prices moved +8.0% in Allenby Gardens and +12.2% in Pasadena (an estimate), so recent momentum favours Pasadena, although both suburbs recorded growth.

Rental vacancy is 0.3% in Allenby Gardens and 0.5% in Pasadena, 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.

Pasadena is the bigger suburb, with a population of 3,073 against 2,045, larger than Allenby Gardens; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Allenby Gardens for rental income, Allenby Gardens for a lower purchase price, Pasadena for recent price momentum, Allenby Gardens for the tighter rental market. Which matters more depends on whether the investor is buying for cash flow, capital growth or affordability.

Keep exploring

Compare any 2-4 Australian suburbs

Build your own multi-suburb comparison with the full interactive tool.

Open interactive comparison