Skip to main content

Athelstone vs Port Noarlunga

Property investment comparison - Athelstone, SA 5076 vs Port Noarlunga, SA 5167

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Athelstone wins 3, Port Noarlunga wins 1. 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.

MetricAthelstonePort Noarlunga
Median house price$1.1M-
Median unit price$630K$670K
Gross rental yield (houses)3.30%3.46%
Gross rental yield (units)-4.42%
1-year house growth+14.1%+12.8%estimate
3-year house growth+41.1%-
Vacancy rate0.5%1.2%
Population9,6013,245

Athelstone vs Port Noarlunga: what the numbers say

For units, Athelstone sits at a median of $630K against $670K in Port Noarlunga, which makes Athelstone the more affordable unit market and Port Noarlunga the pricier one.

On cash flow, Port Noarlunga leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 3.46%, compared with 3.30% in Athelstone, a gap of 0.16 percentage points.

Over the past year house prices moved +14.1% in Athelstone and +12.8% in Port Noarlunga (an estimate), so recent momentum favours Athelstone, although both suburbs recorded growth.

Rental vacancy is 0.5% in Athelstone and 1.2% in Port Noarlunga, 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 3,245, roughly 3.0 times the size of Port Noarlunga; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Port Noarlunga 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