Skip to main content

Buchanan vs Lethbridge Park

Property investment comparison - Buchanan, NSW 2323 vs Lethbridge Park, NSW 2770

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Buchanan wins 1, Lethbridge Park wins 3. 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.

MetricBuchananLethbridge Park
Median house price$900K$900K
Median unit price$540K$465K
Gross rental yield (houses)3.99%3.06%
Gross rental yield (units)5.48%5.57%
1-year house growth-+9.8%
3-year house growth-+38.0%
Vacancy rate1.9%0.8%
Population2124,730

Buchanan vs Lethbridge Park: what the numbers say

Houses cost about the same in both suburbs: the median house price is $900K in Buchanan and $900K in Lethbridge Park.

For units, Buchanan sits at a median of $540K against $465K in Lethbridge Park, which makes Lethbridge Park the more affordable unit market and Buchanan the pricier one.

On cash flow, Buchanan leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 3.99%, compared with 3.06% in Lethbridge Park, a gap of 0.93 percentage points.

Rental vacancy is 0.8% in Lethbridge Park and 1.9% in Buchanan, so landlords in Lethbridge Park face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.

Lethbridge Park is the bigger suburb, with a population of 4,730 against 212, roughly 22 times the size of Buchanan; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Buchanan for rental income, Lethbridge 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