Skip to main content

Bellevue Heights vs Seaford Meadows

Property investment comparison - Bellevue Heights, SA 5050 vs Seaford Meadows, SA 5169

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Bellevue Heights wins 1, Seaford Meadows wins 3. 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.

MetricBellevue HeightsSeaford Meadows
Median house price$1.2M-
Median unit price-$545K
Gross rental yield (houses)3.00%-
Gross rental yield (units)2.50%5.06%
1-year house growth+15.9%+11.1%
3-year house growth+35.0%+36.3%
Vacancy rate1.6%0.5%
Population2,7125,102

Bellevue Heights vs Seaford Meadows: what the numbers say

Over the past year house prices moved +15.9% in Bellevue Heights and +11.1% in Seaford Meadows, so recent momentum favours Bellevue Heights, although both suburbs recorded growth.

Looking back three years, Bellevue Heights houses are +35.0% and Seaford Meadows houses +36.3%, so Seaford Meadows has compounded faster than Bellevue Heights over the longer window.

Rental vacancy is 0.5% in Seaford Meadows and 1.6% in Bellevue Heights, so landlords in Seaford Meadows face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.

Seaford Meadows is the bigger suburb, with a population of 5,102 against 2,712, larger than Bellevue Heights; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Bellevue Heights for recent price momentum, Seaford Meadows 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