Blayney vs Gresford
Property investment comparison - Blayney, NSW 2799 vs Gresford, NSW 2311
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Blayney wins 2, Gresford wins 0. 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 | Blayney | Gresford |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $625K | $625K |
| Median unit price | $495K | - |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 4.61% | 3.08% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | 4.30% | - |
| 1-year house growth | +11.4% | - |
| 3-year house growth | +23.4% | - |
| Vacancy rate | 1.2% | 4.1% |
| Population | 3,448 | 240 |
Blayney vs Gresford: what the numbers say
Houses cost about the same in both suburbs: the median house price is $625K in Blayney and $625K in Gresford.
On cash flow, Blayney leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 4.61%, compared with 3.08% in Gresford, a gap of 1.53 percentage points.
Rental vacancy is 1.2% in Blayney and 4.1% in Gresford, so landlords in Blayney face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.
Blayney is the bigger suburb, with a population of 3,448 against 240, roughly 14 times the size of Gresford; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Blayney for rental income, Blayney 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