Skip to main content

Hawks Nest vs Robertson

Property investment comparison - Hawks Nest, NSW 2324 vs Robertson, NSW 2577

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Hawks Nest wins 2, Robertson wins 2. 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.

MetricHawks NestRobertson
Median house price$1.2M$1.2M
Median unit price-$645K
Gross rental yield (houses)2.69%3.20%
Gross rental yield (units)3.88%5.56%
1-year house growth-+1.1%
3-year house growth+34.5%+2.4%
Vacancy rate1.2%3.4%
Population1,4132,017

Hawks Nest vs Robertson: what the numbers say

Houses cost about the same in both suburbs: the median house price is $1.2M in Hawks Nest and $1.2M in Robertson.

On cash flow, Robertson leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 3.20%, compared with 2.69% in Hawks Nest, a gap of 0.51 percentage points.

Looking back three years, Hawks Nest houses are +34.5% and Robertson houses +2.4%, so Hawks Nest has compounded faster than Robertson over the longer window.

Rental vacancy is 1.2% in Hawks Nest and 3.4% in Robertson, so landlords in Hawks Nest face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.

Robertson is the bigger suburb, with a population of 2,017 against 1,413, larger than Hawks Nest; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Robertson for rental income, Hawks Nest 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