Skip to main content

Auburn vs Berala

Property investment comparison - Auburn, NSW 2144 vs Berala, NSW 2141

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Auburn wins 3, Berala 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.

MetricAuburnBerala
Median house price$1.6M$1.6M
Median unit price$595K$520K
Gross rental yield (houses)2.49%-
Gross rental yield (units)5.71%5.49%
1-year house growth+8.5%+5.9%estimate
3-year house growth+14.7%-
Vacancy rate1.4%1.1%
Population39,3338,757

Auburn vs Berala: what the numbers say

The median house price is $1.6M in Auburn and $1.6M in Berala, so Auburn is the cheaper entry point.

For units, Auburn sits at a median of $595K against $520K in Berala, which makes Berala the more affordable unit market and Auburn the pricier one.

Over the past year house prices moved +8.5% in Auburn and +5.9% in Berala (an estimate), so recent momentum favours Auburn, although both suburbs recorded growth.

Rental vacancy is 1.1% in Berala and 1.4% in Auburn, so landlords in Berala face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.

Auburn is the bigger suburb, with a population of 39,333 against 8,757, roughly 4.5 times the size of Berala; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Auburn for a lower purchase price, Auburn for recent price momentum, Berala 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