Highfields vs Oak Flats
Property investment comparison - Highfields, NSW 2289 vs Oak Flats, NSW 2529
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Highfields wins 0, Oak Flats 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 | Highfields | Oak Flats |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $1.0M | $1.0M |
| Median unit price | - | $840K |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | - | 3.79% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | 4.37% | 4.40% |
| 1-year house growth | +1.1% | +12.2%estimate |
| 3-year house growth | +27.5% | - |
| Vacancy rate | 3.4% | 0.7% |
| Population | 936 | 6,840 |
Highfields vs Oak Flats: what the numbers say
Houses cost about the same in both suburbs: the median house price is $1.0M in Highfields and $1.0M in Oak Flats.
Over the past year house prices moved +1.1% in Highfields and +12.2% in Oak Flats (an estimate), so recent momentum favours Oak Flats, although both suburbs recorded growth.
Rental vacancy is 0.7% in Oak Flats and 3.4% in Highfields, so landlords in Oak Flats face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.
Oak Flats is the bigger suburb, with a population of 6,840 against 936, roughly 7 times the size of Highfields; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Oak Flats for recent price momentum, Oak Flats 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