Cudgen vs Smithfield
Property investment comparison - Cudgen, NSW 2487 vs Smithfield, NSW 2164
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Cudgen wins 0, Smithfield 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 | Cudgen | Smithfield |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $1.3M | $1.3M |
| Median unit price | - | $980K |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 4.92% | - |
| Gross rental yield (units) | - | 3.45% |
| 1-year house growth | +7.2%estimate | +8.7% |
| 3-year house growth | - | +19.1% |
| Vacancy rate | 3.4% | 1.1% |
| Population | 952 | 13,160 |
Cudgen vs Smithfield: what the numbers say
The median house price is $1.3M in Cudgen and $1.3M in Smithfield, so Smithfield is the cheaper entry point.
Over the past year house prices moved +7.2% in Cudgen (an estimate) and +8.7% in Smithfield, so recent momentum favours Smithfield, although both suburbs recorded growth.
Rental vacancy is 1.1% in Smithfield and 3.4% in Cudgen, so landlords in Smithfield face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.
Smithfield is the bigger suburb, with a population of 13,160 against 952, roughly 14 times the size of Cudgen; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Smithfield for a lower purchase price, Smithfield for recent price momentum, Smithfield 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