Skip to main content

Earlwood vs Parma

Property investment comparison - Earlwood, NSW 2206 vs Parma, NSW 2540

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Earlwood wins 2, Parma 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.

MetricEarlwoodParma
Median house price$2.1M$2.1M
Median unit price$965K$625K
Gross rental yield (houses)2.43%1.48%
Gross rental yield (units)3.83%4.64%
1-year house growth-0.4%estimate-
3-year house growth--
Vacancy rate1.1%2.3%
Population18,053167

Earlwood vs Parma: what the numbers say

The median house price is $2.1M in Earlwood and $2.1M in Parma, so Parma is the cheaper entry point.

For units, Earlwood sits at a median of $965K against $625K in Parma, which makes Parma the more affordable unit market and Earlwood the pricier one.

On cash flow, Earlwood leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 2.43%, compared with 1.48% in Parma, a gap of 0.95 percentage points.

Rental vacancy is 1.1% in Earlwood and 2.3% in Parma, so landlords in Earlwood face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.

Earlwood is the bigger suburb, with a population of 18,053 against 167, roughly 108 times the size of Parma; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Earlwood for rental income, Parma for a lower purchase price, Earlwood 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
Earlwood vs Parma: Property Investment Comparison (2026)