Skip to main content

Glenning Valley vs Kincumber

Property investment comparison - Glenning Valley, NSW 2261 vs Kincumber, NSW 2251

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Glenning Valley wins 2, Kincumber 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.

MetricGlenning ValleyKincumber
Median house price$1.2M$1.2M
Median unit price-$745K
Gross rental yield (houses)4.10%3.30%
Gross rental yield (units)4.43%-
1-year house growth+4.9%estimate+4.6%
3-year house growth-+16.9%
Vacancy rate1.5%1.3%
Population2,0237,398

Glenning Valley vs Kincumber: what the numbers say

Houses cost about the same in both suburbs: the median house price is $1.2M in Glenning Valley and $1.2M in Kincumber.

On cash flow, Glenning Valley leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 4.10%, compared with 3.30% in Kincumber, a gap of 0.80 percentage points.

Over the past year house prices moved +4.9% in Glenning Valley (an estimate) and +4.6% in Kincumber, so recent momentum favours Glenning Valley, although both suburbs recorded growth.

Rental vacancy is 1.3% in Kincumber and 1.5% in Glenning Valley, so landlords in Kincumber face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.

Kincumber is the bigger suburb, with a population of 7,398 against 2,023, roughly 3.7 times the size of Glenning Valley; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Glenning Valley for rental income, Glenning Valley for recent price momentum, Kincumber 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