Carnes Hill vs The Oaks
Property investment comparison - Carnes Hill, NSW 2171 vs The Oaks, NSW 2570
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Carnes Hill wins 1, The Oaks 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.
| Metric | Carnes Hill | The Oaks |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $1.4M | $1.4M |
| Median unit price | $885K | - |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | - | 2.50% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | 4.16% | 3.80% |
| 1-year house growth | +0.1% | +10.2% |
| 3-year house growth | +18.3% | +33.9% |
| Vacancy rate | 2.4% | 2.2% |
| Population | 3,332 | 2,982 |
Carnes Hill vs The Oaks: what the numbers say
Houses cost about the same in both suburbs: the median house price is $1.4M in Carnes Hill and $1.4M in The Oaks.
Over the past year house prices moved +0.1% in Carnes Hill and +10.2% in The Oaks, so recent momentum favours The Oaks, although both suburbs recorded growth.
Looking back three years, Carnes Hill houses are +18.3% and The Oaks houses +33.9%, so The Oaks has compounded faster than Carnes Hill over the longer window.
Rental vacancy is 2.2% in The Oaks and 2.4% in Carnes Hill, so landlords in The Oaks face less competition for tenants.
Carnes Hill is the bigger suburb, with a population of 3,332 against 2,982, larger than The Oaks; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: The Oaks for recent price momentum, The Oaks 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