Skip to main content

Bellevue Heights vs Warradale

Property investment comparison - Bellevue Heights, SA 5050 vs Warradale, SA 5046

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Bellevue Heights wins 2, Warradale 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 HeightsWarradale
Median house price$1.2M-
Median unit price-$755K
Gross rental yield (houses)3.00%2.79%
Gross rental yield (units)2.50%3.79%
1-year house growth+15.9%+10.7%
3-year house growth+35.0%+55.3%
Vacancy rate1.6%0.8%
Population2,7125,801

Bellevue Heights vs Warradale: what the numbers say

On cash flow, Bellevue Heights leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 3.00%, compared with 2.79% in Warradale, a gap of 0.21 percentage points.

Over the past year house prices moved +15.9% in Bellevue Heights and +10.7% in Warradale, so recent momentum favours Bellevue Heights, although both suburbs recorded growth.

Looking back three years, Bellevue Heights houses are +35.0% and Warradale houses +55.3%, so Warradale has compounded faster than Bellevue Heights over the longer window.

Rental vacancy is 0.8% in Warradale and 1.6% in Bellevue Heights, so landlords in Warradale face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.

Warradale is the bigger suburb, with a population of 5,801 against 2,712, roughly 2.1 times the size of Bellevue Heights; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

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