Bewong vs North Macksville
Property investment comparison - Bewong, NSW 2540 vs North Macksville, NSW 2447
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Bewong wins 2, North Macksville 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 | Bewong | North Macksville |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $820K | $820K |
| Median unit price | $625K | - |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 4.05% | 3.79% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | 4.25% | 5.18% |
| 1-year house growth | - | +7.8%estimate |
| 3-year house growth | - | - |
| Vacancy rate | 2.4% | 2.6% |
| Population | 80 | 669 |
Bewong vs North Macksville: what the numbers say
Houses cost about the same in both suburbs: the median house price is $820K in Bewong and $820K in North Macksville.
On cash flow, Bewong leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 4.05%, compared with 3.79% in North Macksville, a gap of 0.26 percentage points.
Rental vacancy is 2.4% in Bewong and 2.6% in North Macksville, so landlords in Bewong face less competition for tenants.
North Macksville is the bigger suburb, with a population of 669 against 80, roughly 8 times the size of Bewong; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Bewong for rental income, Bewong for the tighter rental market. Which matters more depends on whether the investor is buying for cash flow, capital growth or affordability.
Full profile
North Macksville, NSW 2447
Open North Macksville suburb profileRecent sales in North Macksville
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