Buxton vs Paterson

Houses cost about the same in both suburbs: the median house price is $950K in Buxton and $950K in Paterson.

For units, Buxton sits at a median of $675K against $465K in Paterson, which makes Paterson the more affordable unit market and Buxton the pricier one.

On cash flow, Paterson leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 3.56%, compared with 3.50% in Buxton, a gap of 0.06 percentage points.

Over the past year house prices moved +11.8% in Buxton and -2.7% in Paterson, so recent momentum favours Buxton, while Paterson went backwards.

Looking back three years, Buxton houses are +25.5% and Paterson houses +10.7%, so Buxton has compounded faster than Paterson over the longer window.

Rental vacancy is 1.5% in Buxton and 1.6% in Paterson, so landlords in Buxton face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.

Buxton is the bigger suburb, with a population of 2,071 against 960, roughly 2.2 times the size of Paterson; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Paterson for rental income, Buxton for recent price momentum, Buxton for the tighter rental market. Which matters more depends on whether the investor is buying for cash flow, capital growth or affordability.