Athelstone vs Green Hills Range
Property investment comparison - Athelstone, SA 5076 vs Green Hills Range, SA 5153
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Athelstone wins 2, Green Hills Range 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 | Athelstone | Green Hills Range |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $1.1M | - |
| Median unit price | $630K | - |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 3.30% | 3.15% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | - | - |
| 1-year house growth | +14.1% | - |
| 3-year house growth | +41.1% | - |
| Vacancy rate | 0.5% | 2.6% |
| Population | 9,601 | 88 |
Athelstone vs Green Hills Range: what the numbers say
On cash flow, Athelstone leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 3.30%, compared with 3.15% in Green Hills Range, a gap of 0.15 percentage points.
Rental vacancy is 0.5% in Athelstone and 2.6% in Green Hills Range, so landlords in Athelstone 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 88, roughly 109 times the size of Green Hills Range; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Athelstone for rental income, Athelstone for the tighter rental market. Which matters more depends on whether the investor is buying for cash flow, capital growth or affordability.
Full profile
Green Hills Range, SA 5153
Open Green Hills Range suburb profileRecent sales in Green Hills Range
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