Boston vs Hillier
Property investment comparison - Boston, SA 5607 vs Hillier, SA 5116
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Boston wins 2, Hillier 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 | Boston | Hillier |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $825K | $835K |
| Median unit price | $375K | - |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 4.37% | 3.69% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | 3.55% | 4.45% |
| 1-year house growth | +0.7% | - |
| 3-year house growth | +34.0% | - |
| Vacancy rate | 4.8% | 2.1% |
| Population | 1,169 | 814 |
Boston vs Hillier: what the numbers say
The median house price is $825K in Boston and $835K in Hillier, so Boston is the cheaper entry point, with Hillier houses about 1% dearer.
On cash flow, Boston leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 4.37%, compared with 3.69% in Hillier, a gap of 0.68 percentage points.
Rental vacancy is 2.1% in Hillier and 4.8% in Boston, so landlords in Hillier face less competition for tenants.
Boston is the bigger suburb, with a population of 1,169 against 814, larger than Hillier; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Boston for rental income, Boston for a lower purchase price, Hillier 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