Skip to main content

Bundeena vs Colebee

Property investment comparison - Bundeena, NSW 2230 vs Colebee, NSW 2761

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Bundeena wins 1, Colebee 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.

MetricBundeenaColebee
Median house price$1.4M$1.4M
Median unit price-$720K
Gross rental yield (houses)3.20%3.20%
Gross rental yield (units)2.33%4.27%
1-year house growth+2.8%+4.0%
3-year house growth-9.7%+10.6%
Vacancy rate1.6%2.2%
Population2,1034,914

Bundeena vs Colebee: what the numbers say

Houses cost about the same in both suburbs: the median house price is $1.4M in Bundeena and $1.4M in Colebee.

Gross rental yield on houses is effectively level, at 3.20% in Bundeena and 3.20% in Colebee, so neither suburb has a cash flow edge on houses.

Over the past year house prices moved +2.8% in Bundeena and +4.0% in Colebee, so recent momentum favours Colebee, although both suburbs recorded growth.

Looking back three years, Bundeena houses are -9.7% and Colebee houses +10.6%, so Colebee has compounded faster than Bundeena over the longer window.

Rental vacancy is 1.6% in Bundeena and 2.2% in Colebee, so landlords in Bundeena face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.

Colebee is the bigger suburb, with a population of 4,914 against 2,103, roughly 2.3 times the size of Bundeena; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Colebee for recent price momentum, Bundeena 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