Bibbenluke vs Turvey Park
Property investment comparison - Bibbenluke, NSW 2632 vs Turvey Park, NSW 2650
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Bibbenluke wins 0, Turvey Park 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 | Bibbenluke | Turvey Park |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $780K | $780K |
| Median unit price | - | - |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 2.89% | 3.98% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | - | 3.54% |
| 1-year house growth | - | +15.6%estimate |
| 3-year house growth | - | - |
| Vacancy rate | 1.7% | 1.1% |
| Population | 82 | 3,572 |
Bibbenluke vs Turvey Park: what the numbers say
Houses cost about the same in both suburbs: the median house price is $780K in Bibbenluke and $780K in Turvey Park.
On cash flow, Turvey Park leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 3.98%, compared with 2.89% in Bibbenluke, a gap of 1.09 percentage points.
Rental vacancy is 1.1% in Turvey Park and 1.7% in Bibbenluke, so landlords in Turvey Park face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.
Turvey Park is the bigger suburb, with a population of 3,572 against 82, roughly 44 times the size of Bibbenluke; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Turvey Park for rental income, Turvey Park 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