Bannaby vs Wakeley
Property investment comparison - Bannaby, NSW 2580 vs Wakeley, NSW 2176
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Bannaby wins 1, Wakeley 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.
| Metric | Bannaby | Wakeley |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $1.4M | $1.4M |
| Median unit price | $565K | - |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | - | 2.59% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | 4.25% | 3.80% |
| 1-year house growth | - | +9.0% |
| 3-year house growth | - | +28.6% |
| Vacancy rate | 6.1% | 2.0% |
| Population | 47 | 4,893 |
Bannaby vs Wakeley: what the numbers say
Houses cost about the same in both suburbs: the median house price is $1.4M in Bannaby and $1.4M in Wakeley.
Rental vacancy is 2.0% in Wakeley and 6.1% in Bannaby, so landlords in Wakeley face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.
Wakeley is the bigger suburb, with a population of 4,893 against 47, roughly 104 times the size of Bannaby; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Wakeley 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