Glenwood vs Patonga
Property investment comparison - Glenwood, NSW 2768 vs Patonga, NSW 2256
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Glenwood wins 0, Patonga 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 | Glenwood | Patonga |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $1.7M | $1.7M |
| Median unit price | - | $695K |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | - | 2.42% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | 3.34% | - |
| 1-year house growth | +1.0% | +8.9%estimate |
| 3-year house growth | +8.4% | - |
| Vacancy rate | 1.6% | 1.3% |
| Population | 15,829 | 235 |
Glenwood vs Patonga: what the numbers say
The median house price is $1.7M in Glenwood and $1.7M in Patonga, so Patonga is the cheaper entry point, with Glenwood houses about 1% dearer.
Over the past year house prices moved +1.0% in Glenwood and +8.9% in Patonga (an estimate), so recent momentum favours Patonga, although both suburbs recorded growth.
Rental vacancy is 1.3% in Patonga and 1.6% in Glenwood, so landlords in Patonga face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.
Glenwood is the bigger suburb, with a population of 15,829 against 235, roughly 67 times the size of Patonga; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Patonga for a lower purchase price, Patonga for recent price momentum, Patonga 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