Skip to main content

Buchanan vs Nana Glen

Property investment comparison - Buchanan, NSW 2323 vs Nana Glen, NSW 2450

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Buchanan wins 3, Nana Glen wins 1. 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.

MetricBuchananNana Glen
Median house price$900K$900K
Median unit price$540K$565K
Gross rental yield (houses)3.99%3.67%
Gross rental yield (units)5.48%4.41%
1-year house growth-+13.9%estimate
3-year house growth--
Vacancy rate1.9%1.6%
Population2121,132

Buchanan vs Nana Glen: what the numbers say

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

For units, Buchanan sits at a median of $540K against $565K in Nana Glen, which makes Buchanan the more affordable unit market and Nana Glen the pricier one.

On cash flow, Buchanan leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 3.99%, compared with 3.67% in Nana Glen, a gap of 0.32 percentage points.

Rental vacancy is 1.6% in Nana Glen and 1.9% in Buchanan, so landlords in Nana Glen face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.

Nana Glen is the bigger suburb, with a population of 1,132 against 212, roughly 5 times the size of Buchanan; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Buchanan for rental income, Nana Glen 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