Skip to main content

Eraring vs Sylvania

Property investment comparison - Eraring, NSW 2264 vs Sylvania, NSW 2224

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Eraring wins 2, Sylvania 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.

MetricEraringSylvania
Median house price$2.1M$2.1M
Median unit price$580K$1.3M
Gross rental yield (houses)1.79%2.89%
Gross rental yield (units)5.33%3.18%
1-year house growth-+5.4%estimate
3-year house growth--
Vacancy rate2.6%1.7%
Population22110,749

Eraring vs Sylvania: what the numbers say

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

For units, Eraring sits at a median of $580K against $1.3M in Sylvania, which makes Eraring the more affordable unit market and Sylvania the pricier one.

On cash flow, Sylvania leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 2.89%, compared with 1.79% in Eraring, a gap of 1.10 percentage points.

Rental vacancy is 1.7% in Sylvania and 2.6% in Eraring, so landlords in Sylvania face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.

Sylvania is the bigger suburb, with a population of 10,749 against 221, roughly 49 times the size of Eraring; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Sylvania for rental income, Sylvania for a lower purchase price, Sylvania 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