Skip to main content

Athelstone vs Ferryden Park

Property investment comparison - Athelstone, SA 5076 vs Ferryden Park, SA 5010

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Athelstone wins 2, Ferryden Park 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.

MetricAthelstoneFerryden Park
Median house price$1.1M-
Median unit price$630K-
Gross rental yield (houses)3.30%3.71%
Gross rental yield (units)--
1-year house growth+14.1%+9.9%
3-year house growth+41.1%+27.9%
Vacancy rate0.5%0.3%
Population9,6014,495

Athelstone vs Ferryden Park: what the numbers say

On cash flow, Ferryden Park leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 3.71%, compared with 3.30% in Athelstone, a gap of 0.41 percentage points.

Over the past year house prices moved +14.1% in Athelstone and +9.9% in Ferryden Park, so recent momentum favours Athelstone, although both suburbs recorded growth.

Looking back three years, Athelstone houses are +41.1% and Ferryden Park houses +27.9%, so Athelstone has compounded faster than Ferryden Park over the longer window.

Rental vacancy is 0.3% in Ferryden Park and 0.5% in Athelstone, so landlords in Ferryden Park face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.

Athelstone is the bigger suburb, with a population of 9,601 against 4,495, roughly 2.1 times the size of Ferryden Park; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Ferryden Park for rental income, Athelstone for recent price momentum, Ferryden Park 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