Busby vs Springfield
Property investment comparison - Busby, NSW 2168 vs Springfield, NSW 2250
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Busby wins 1, Springfield 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 | Busby | Springfield |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $1.0M | $1.0M |
| Median unit price | $770K | - |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | - | 3.65% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | 3.85% | - |
| 1-year house growth | +11.5% | +3.3%estimate |
| 3-year house growth | +31.4% | - |
| Vacancy rate | 1.5% | 1.3% |
| Population | 4,446 | 4,310 |
Busby vs Springfield: what the numbers say
The median house price is $1.0M in Busby and $1.0M in Springfield, so Springfield is the cheaper entry point.
Over the past year house prices moved +11.5% in Busby and +3.3% in Springfield (an estimate), so recent momentum favours Busby, although both suburbs recorded growth.
Rental vacancy is 1.3% in Springfield and 1.5% in Busby, so landlords in Springfield face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.
Busby is the bigger suburb, with a population of 4,446 against 4,310, larger than Springfield; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Springfield for a lower purchase price, Busby for recent price momentum, Springfield for the tighter rental market. 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