Angus vs Kurnell
Property investment comparison - Angus, NSW 2765 vs Kurnell, NSW 2231
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Angus wins 1, Kurnell 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.
| Metric | Angus | Kurnell |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $1.9M | $1.9M |
| Median unit price | $860K | $1.1M |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 2.51% | 2.76% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | 3.65% | - |
| 1-year house growth | - | +4.8% |
| 3-year house growth | - | +23.3% |
| Vacancy rate | 6.0% | 1.5% |
| Population | 384 | 2,528 |
Angus vs Kurnell: what the numbers say
Houses cost about the same in both suburbs: the median house price is $1.9M in Angus and $1.9M in Kurnell.
For units, Angus sits at a median of $860K against $1.1M in Kurnell, which makes Angus the more affordable unit market and Kurnell the pricier one.
On cash flow, Kurnell leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 2.76%, compared with 2.51% in Angus, a gap of 0.25 percentage points.
Rental vacancy is 1.5% in Kurnell and 6.0% in Angus, so landlords in Kurnell face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.
Kurnell is the bigger suburb, with a population of 2,528 against 384, roughly 7 times the size of Angus; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Kurnell for rental income, Kurnell 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