Skip to main content

Burringbar vs Manyana

Property investment comparison - Burringbar, NSW 2484 vs Manyana, NSW 2539

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Burringbar wins 3, Manyana 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.

MetricBurringbarManyana
Median house price$905K$905K
Median unit price$575K$695K
Gross rental yield (houses)4.69%2.87%
Gross rental yield (units)4.58%4.06%
1-year house growth-7.8%estimate-2.2%
3-year house growth-6.2%+13.4%
Vacancy rate0.7%0.7%
Population878670

Burringbar vs Manyana: what the numbers say

Houses cost about the same in both suburbs: the median house price is $905K in Burringbar and $905K in Manyana.

For units, Burringbar sits at a median of $575K against $695K in Manyana, which makes Burringbar the more affordable unit market and Manyana the pricier one.

On cash flow, Burringbar leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 4.69%, compared with 2.87% in Manyana, a gap of 1.82 percentage points.

Over the past year house prices moved -7.8% in Burringbar (an estimate) and -2.2% in Manyana, so recent momentum favours Manyana, while Burringbar went backwards.

Looking back three years, Burringbar houses are -6.2% and Manyana houses +13.4%, so Manyana has compounded faster than Burringbar over the longer window.

Rental vacancy is the same in both, at 0.7%.

Burringbar is the bigger suburb, with a population of 878 against 670, larger than Manyana; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Burringbar for rental income, Manyana for recent price momentum. 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