Heathfield vs Hove
Property investment comparison - Heathfield, SA 5153 vs Hove, SA 5048
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Heathfield wins 1, Hove 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.
| Metric | Heathfield | Hove |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $1.4M | $1.4M |
| Median unit price | $680K | - |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 2.60% | 2.80% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | 3.15% | - |
| 1-year house growth | - | +8.7% |
| 3-year house growth | - | +14.2% |
| Vacancy rate | 3.9% | 0.5% |
| Population | 1,062 | 3,189 |
Heathfield vs Hove: what the numbers say
The median house price is $1.4M in Heathfield and $1.4M in Hove, so Heathfield is the cheaper entry point, with Hove houses about 1% dearer.
On cash flow, Hove leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 2.80%, compared with 2.60% in Heathfield, a gap of 0.20 percentage points.
Rental vacancy is 0.5% in Hove and 3.9% in Heathfield, so landlords in Hove face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.
Hove is the bigger suburb, with a population of 3,189 against 1,062, roughly 3.0 times the size of Heathfield; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Hove for rental income, Heathfield for a lower purchase price, Hove 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