Athelstone vs St Peters

For units, Athelstone sits at a median of $630K against $725K in St Peters, which makes Athelstone the more affordable unit market and St Peters the pricier one.

On cash flow, Athelstone leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 3.30%, compared with 1.90% in St Peters, a gap of 1.40 percentage points.

Over the past year house prices moved +14.1% in Athelstone and +14.3% in St Peters, so recent momentum favours St Peters, although both suburbs recorded growth.

Looking back three years, Athelstone houses are +41.1% and St Peters houses +25.6%, so Athelstone has compounded faster than St Peters over the longer window.

Rental vacancy is 0.5% in Athelstone and 1.0% in St Peters, 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 3,231, roughly 3.0 times the size of St Peters; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Athelstone for rental income, St Peters 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.