Skip to main content

Bellevue Heights vs Seaton

Property investment comparison - Bellevue Heights, SA 5050 vs Seaton, SA 5023

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Bellevue Heights wins 1, Seaton wins 4. 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 HeightsSeaton
Median house price$1.2M-
Median unit price--
Gross rental yield (houses)3.00%3.17%
Gross rental yield (units)2.50%4.15%
1-year house growth+15.9%+12.2%
3-year house growth+35.0%+38.3%
Vacancy rate1.6%1.1%
Population2,71210,877

Bellevue Heights vs Seaton: what the numbers say

On cash flow, Seaton leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 3.17%, compared with 3.00% in Bellevue Heights, a gap of 0.17 percentage points.

Over the past year house prices moved +15.9% in Bellevue Heights and +12.2% in Seaton, so recent momentum favours Bellevue Heights, although both suburbs recorded growth.

Looking back three years, Bellevue Heights houses are +35.0% and Seaton houses +38.3%, so Seaton has compounded faster than Bellevue Heights over the longer window.

Rental vacancy is 1.1% in Seaton and 1.6% in Bellevue Heights, so landlords in Seaton face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.

Seaton is the bigger suburb, with a population of 10,877 against 2,712, roughly 4.0 times the size of Bellevue Heights; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Seaton for rental income, Bellevue Heights for recent price momentum, Seaton 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