Gymea Bay vs Stanwell Park
Property investment comparison - Gymea Bay, NSW 2227 vs Stanwell Park, NSW 2508
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Gymea Bay wins 2, Stanwell Park 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.
| Metric | Gymea Bay | Stanwell Park |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $2.2M | $2.2M |
| Median unit price | $1.5M | - |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 3.08% | - |
| Gross rental yield (units) | 6.03% | 3.51% |
| 1-year house growth | +5.0% | +9.4%estimate |
| 3-year house growth | +11.6% | - |
| Vacancy rate | 0.2% | 2.5% |
| Population | 6,983 | 1,532 |
Gymea Bay vs Stanwell Park: what the numbers say
Houses cost about the same in both suburbs: the median house price is $2.2M in Gymea Bay and $2.2M in Stanwell Park.
Over the past year house prices moved +5.0% in Gymea Bay and +9.4% in Stanwell Park (an estimate), so recent momentum favours Stanwell Park, although both suburbs recorded growth.
Rental vacancy is 0.2% in Gymea Bay and 2.5% in Stanwell Park, so landlords in Gymea Bay face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.
Gymea Bay is the bigger suburb, with a population of 6,983 against 1,532, roughly 4.6 times the size of Stanwell Park; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Stanwell Park for recent price momentum, Gymea Bay 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