Skip to main content

Cheltenham vs Oatley

Property investment comparison - Cheltenham, NSW 2119 vs Oatley, NSW 2223

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Cheltenham wins 2, Oatley 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.

MetricCheltenhamOatley
Median house price$2.7M$2.7M
Median unit price-$1.1M
Gross rental yield (houses)1.85%2.24%
Gross rental yield (units)2.77%-
1-year house growth-8.2%estimate+8.0%
3-year house growth-+13.1%
Vacancy rate1.2%1.3%
Population2,16610,664

Cheltenham vs Oatley: what the numbers say

The median house price is $2.7M in Cheltenham and $2.7M in Oatley, so Cheltenham is the cheaper entry point, with Oatley houses about 1% dearer.

On cash flow, Oatley leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 2.24%, compared with 1.85% in Cheltenham, a gap of 0.39 percentage points.

Over the past year house prices moved -8.2% in Cheltenham (an estimate) and +8.0% in Oatley, so recent momentum favours Oatley, while Cheltenham went backwards.

Rental vacancy is 1.2% in Cheltenham and 1.3% in Oatley, so landlords in Cheltenham face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.

Oatley is the bigger suburb, with a population of 10,664 against 2,166, roughly 4.9 times the size of Cheltenham; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Oatley for rental income, Cheltenham for a lower purchase price, Oatley for recent price momentum, Cheltenham 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