Skip to main content

Como vs North Rocks

Property investment comparison - Como, NSW 2226 vs North Rocks, NSW 2151

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Como wins 2, North Rocks wins 1. 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.

MetricComoNorth Rocks
Median house price$1.9M$1.9M
Median unit price-$665K
Gross rental yield (houses)2.81%2.59%
Gross rental yield (units)-5.55%
1-year house growth+5.0%estimate+1.1%
3-year house growth--3.8%
Vacancy rate0.5%0.4%
Population4,0539,136

Como vs North Rocks: what the numbers say

Houses cost about the same in both suburbs: the median house price is $1.9M in Como and $1.9M in North Rocks.

On cash flow, Como leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 2.81%, compared with 2.59% in North Rocks, a gap of 0.22 percentage points.

Over the past year house prices moved +5.0% in Como (an estimate) and +1.1% in North Rocks, so recent momentum favours Como, although both suburbs recorded growth.

Rental vacancy is 0.4% in North Rocks and 0.5% in Como, so landlords in North Rocks face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.

North Rocks is the bigger suburb, with a population of 9,136 against 4,053, roughly 2.3 times the size of Como; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Como for rental income, Como for recent price momentum, North Rocks 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