Athelstone vs Longwood
Property investment comparison - Athelstone, SA 5076 vs Longwood, SA 5153
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Athelstone wins 2, Longwood 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 | Longwood |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $1.1M | - |
| Median unit price | $630K | - |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 3.30% | 2.52% |
| 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 | 325 |
Athelstone vs Longwood: what the numbers say
On cash flow, Athelstone leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 3.30%, compared with 2.52% in Longwood, a gap of 0.78 percentage points.
Rental vacancy is 0.5% in Athelstone and 2.6% in Longwood, 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 325, roughly 30 times the size of Longwood; 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.
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