Skip to main content

Cartwright vs Miller

Property investment comparison - Cartwright, NSW 2168 vs Miller, NSW 2168

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Cartwright wins 3, Miller 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.

MetricCartwrightMiller
Median house price$990K$990K
Median unit price$905K$1M
Gross rental yield (houses)-3.15%
Gross rental yield (units)3.52%3.75%
1-year house growth+13.5%+11.9%
3-year house growth+25.5%+26.2%
Vacancy rate0.8%1.3%
Population2,6163,374

Cartwright vs Miller: what the numbers say

Houses cost about the same in both suburbs: the median house price is $990K in Cartwright and $990K in Miller.

For units, Cartwright sits at a median of $905K against $1M in Miller, which makes Cartwright the more affordable unit market and Miller the pricier one.

Over the past year house prices moved +13.5% in Cartwright and +11.9% in Miller, so recent momentum favours Cartwright, although both suburbs recorded growth.

Looking back three years, Cartwright houses are +25.5% and Miller houses +26.2%, so Miller has compounded faster than Cartwright over the longer window.

Rental vacancy is 0.8% in Cartwright and 1.3% in Miller, so landlords in Cartwright face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.

Miller is the bigger suburb, with a population of 3,374 against 2,616, larger than Cartwright; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Cartwright for recent price momentum, Cartwright for the tighter rental market. 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