Skip to main content

Athelstone vs New Port

Property investment comparison - Athelstone, SA 5076 vs New Port, SA 5015

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Athelstone wins 2, New Port 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.

MetricAthelstoneNew Port
Median house price$1.1M-
Median unit price$630K$525K
Gross rental yield (houses)3.30%3.73%
Gross rental yield (units)-4.59%
1-year house growth+14.1%+11.4%
3-year house growth+41.1%-
Vacancy rate0.5%0.8%
Population9,601647

Athelstone vs New Port: what the numbers say

For units, Athelstone sits at a median of $630K against $525K in New Port, which makes New Port the more affordable unit market and Athelstone the pricier one.

On cash flow, New Port leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 3.73%, compared with 3.30% in Athelstone, a gap of 0.43 percentage points.

Over the past year house prices moved +14.1% in Athelstone and +11.4% in New Port, so recent momentum favours Athelstone, although both suburbs recorded growth.

Rental vacancy is 0.5% in Athelstone and 0.8% in New Port, 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 647, roughly 15 times the size of New Port; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: New Port for rental income, Athelstone for recent price momentum, 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

Compare any 2-4 Australian suburbs

Build your own multi-suburb comparison with the full interactive tool.

Open interactive comparison
Athelstone vs New Port: Suburb Comparison 2026