Skip to main content

Box Hill vs Erskine Park

Property investment comparison - Box Hill, NSW 2765 vs Erskine Park, NSW 2759

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Box Hill wins 0, Erskine Park wins 4. 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.

MetricBox HillErskine Park
Median house price$1.3M$1.3M
Median unit price$1.1M$895K
Gross rental yield (houses)-2.75%
Gross rental yield (units)3.33%3.62%
1-year house growth+6.0%+10.7%estimate
3-year house growth+16.4%-
Vacancy rate6.2%1.1%
Population6,4506,486

Box Hill vs Erskine Park: what the numbers say

Houses cost about the same in both suburbs: the median house price is $1.3M in Box Hill and $1.3M in Erskine Park.

For units, Box Hill sits at a median of $1.1M against $895K in Erskine Park, which makes Erskine Park the more affordable unit market and Box Hill the pricier one.

Over the past year house prices moved +6.0% in Box Hill and +10.7% in Erskine Park (an estimate), so recent momentum favours Erskine Park, although both suburbs recorded growth.

Rental vacancy is 1.1% in Erskine Park and 6.2% in Box Hill, so landlords in Erskine Park face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.

Erskine Park is the bigger suburb, with a population of 6,486 against 6,450, larger than Box Hill; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Erskine Park for recent price momentum, Erskine 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

Compare any 2-4 Australian suburbs

Build your own multi-suburb comparison with the full interactive tool.

Open interactive comparison