Athelstone vs Moana
Property investment comparison - Athelstone, SA 5076 vs Moana, SA 5169
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Athelstone wins 1, Moana 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 | Athelstone | Moana |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $1.1M | - |
| Median unit price | $630K | - |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 3.30% | - |
| Gross rental yield (units) | - | 3.91% |
| 1-year house growth | +14.1% | +12.3% |
| 3-year house growth | +41.1% | +45.3% |
| Vacancy rate | 0.5% | 0.5% |
| Population | 9,601 | 3,316 |
Athelstone vs Moana: what the numbers say
Over the past year house prices moved +14.1% in Athelstone and +12.3% in Moana, so recent momentum favours Athelstone, although both suburbs recorded growth.
Looking back three years, Athelstone houses are +41.1% and Moana houses +45.3%, so Moana has compounded faster than Athelstone over the longer window.
Rental vacancy is 0.5% in Moana and 0.5% in Athelstone, so landlords in Moana 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 3,316, roughly 2.9 times the size of Moana; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Athelstone for recent price momentum, Moana 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