Burnside vs Lonsdale
Property investment comparison - Burnside, SA 5066 vs Lonsdale, SA 5160
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Burnside wins 1, Lonsdale 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 | Burnside | Lonsdale |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $1.8M | $2.6M |
| Median unit price | $820K | $460K |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 2.32% | - |
| Gross rental yield (units) | 3.80% | 4.61% |
| 1-year house growth | +4.7% | - |
| 3-year house growth | +42.5% | - |
| Vacancy rate | 3.4% | - |
| Population | 3,060 | 23 |
Burnside vs Lonsdale: what the numbers say
The median house price is $1.8M in Burnside and $2.6M in Lonsdale, so Burnside is the cheaper entry point, with Lonsdale houses about 39% dearer.
For units, Burnside sits at a median of $820K against $460K in Lonsdale, which makes Lonsdale the more affordable unit market and Burnside the pricier one.
Burnside is the bigger suburb, with a population of 3,060 against 23, roughly 133 times the size of Lonsdale; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Burnside for a lower purchase price. 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