Bell vs Wauchope
Property investment comparison - Bell, NSW 2786 vs Wauchope, NSW 2446
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Bell wins 1, Wauchope 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.
| Metric | Bell | Wauchope |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $715K | $710K |
| Median unit price | - | $630K |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 4.78% | 4.50% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | - | - |
| 1-year house growth | - | +7.7% |
| 3-year house growth | - | +9.0% |
| Vacancy rate | 8.4% | 2.2% |
| Population | 44 | 6,589 |
Bell vs Wauchope: what the numbers say
The median house price is $715K in Bell and $710K in Wauchope, so Wauchope is the cheaper entry point, with Bell houses about 1% dearer.
On cash flow, Bell leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 4.78%, compared with 4.50% in Wauchope, a gap of 0.28 percentage points.
Rental vacancy is 2.2% in Wauchope and 8.4% in Bell, so landlords in Wauchope face less competition for tenants.
Wauchope is the bigger suburb, with a population of 6,589 against 44, roughly 150 times the size of Bell; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Bell for rental income, Wauchope for a lower purchase price, Wauchope 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