Skip to main content

Cobaki vs Hurlstone Park

Property investment comparison - Cobaki, NSW 2486 vs Hurlstone Park, NSW 2193

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Cobaki wins 2, Hurlstone Park 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.

MetricCobakiHurlstone Park
Median house price$2.5M$2.5M
Median unit price$740K$845K
Gross rental yield (houses)2.01%2.22%
Gross rental yield (units)4.75%4.25%
1-year house growth-+7.5%estimate
3-year house growth--
Vacancy rate3.1%0.9%
Population2035,001

Cobaki vs Hurlstone Park: what the numbers say

The median house price is $2.5M in Cobaki and $2.5M in Hurlstone Park, so Hurlstone Park is the cheaper entry point.

For units, Cobaki sits at a median of $740K against $845K in Hurlstone Park, which makes Cobaki the more affordable unit market and Hurlstone Park the pricier one.

On cash flow, Hurlstone Park leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 2.22%, compared with 2.01% in Cobaki, a gap of 0.21 percentage points.

Rental vacancy is 0.9% in Hurlstone Park and 3.1% in Cobaki, so landlords in Hurlstone Park face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.

Hurlstone Park is the bigger suburb, with a population of 5,001 against 203, roughly 25 times the size of Cobaki; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Hurlstone Park for rental income, Hurlstone Park for a lower purchase price, Hurlstone Park 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