Amberley vs Ashfield
Property investment comparison - Amberley, QLD 4306 vs Ashfield, QLD 4670
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Amberley wins 4, Ashfield 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 | Amberley | Ashfield |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $910K | $910K |
| Median unit price | $610K | $640K |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 4.02% | 3.99% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | 4.31% | 4.18% |
| 1-year house growth | - | +14.6%estimate |
| 3-year house growth | - | - |
| Vacancy rate | 1.2% | 2.2% |
| Population | 619 | 1,152 |
Amberley vs Ashfield: what the numbers say
Houses cost about the same in both suburbs: the median house price is $910K in Amberley and $910K in Ashfield.
For units, Amberley sits at a median of $610K against $640K in Ashfield, which makes Amberley the more affordable unit market and Ashfield the pricier one.
Gross rental yield on houses is effectively level, at 4.02% in Amberley and 3.99% in Ashfield, so neither suburb has a cash flow edge on houses.
Rental vacancy is 1.2% in Amberley and 2.2% in Ashfield, so landlords in Amberley face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.
Ashfield is the bigger suburb, with a population of 1,152 against 619, larger than Amberley; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Amberley 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