Skip to main content

Alstonvale vs Beaconsfield

Property investment comparison - Alstonvale, NSW 2477 vs Beaconsfield, NSW 2015

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Alstonvale wins 3, Beaconsfield wins 2. 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.

MetricAlstonvaleBeaconsfield
Median house price$2.3M$2.3M
Median unit price$635K$1.4M
Gross rental yield (houses)1.81%2.83%
Gross rental yield (units)5.45%3.43%
1-year house growth-+3.5%
3-year house growth-+13.4%
Vacancy rate0.7%2.6%
Population4311,172

Alstonvale vs Beaconsfield: what the numbers say

The median house price is $2.3M in Alstonvale and $2.3M in Beaconsfield, so Beaconsfield is the cheaper entry point.

For units, Alstonvale sits at a median of $635K against $1.4M in Beaconsfield, which makes Alstonvale the more affordable unit market and Beaconsfield the pricier one.

On cash flow, Beaconsfield leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 2.83%, compared with 1.81% in Alstonvale, a gap of 1.02 percentage points.

Rental vacancy is 0.7% in Alstonvale and 2.6% in Beaconsfield, so landlords in Alstonvale face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.

Beaconsfield is the bigger suburb, with a population of 1,172 against 431, roughly 2.7 times the size of Alstonvale; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Beaconsfield for rental income, Beaconsfield for a lower purchase price, Alstonvale 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