Basket Range vs Macclesfield
Property investment comparison - Basket Range, SA 5138 vs Macclesfield, SA 5153
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Basket Range wins 1, Macclesfield 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 | Basket Range | Macclesfield |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $1.1M | $1.1M |
| Median unit price | - | $750K |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 2.97% | 3.40% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | - | 3.00% |
| 1-year house growth | - | +10.6% |
| 3-year house growth | - | +44.9% |
| Vacancy rate | - | 2.1% |
| Population | 364 | 1,413 |
Basket Range vs Macclesfield: what the numbers say
The median house price is $1.1M in Basket Range and $1.1M in Macclesfield, so Basket Range is the cheaper entry point, with Macclesfield houses about 3% dearer.
On cash flow, Macclesfield leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 3.40%, compared with 2.97% in Basket Range, a gap of 0.43 percentage points.
Macclesfield is the bigger suburb, with a population of 1,413 against 364, roughly 3.9 times the size of Basket Range; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Macclesfield for rental income, Basket Range for a lower purchase price. 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