Skip to main content

Hurlstone Park vs Oatlands

Property investment comparison - Hurlstone Park, NSW 2193 vs Oatlands, NSW 2117

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Hurlstone Park wins 3, Oatlands wins 0. 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.

MetricHurlstone ParkOatlands
Median house price$2.5M$2.5M
Median unit price$845K$1.2M
Gross rental yield (houses)2.22%-
Gross rental yield (units)4.25%-
1-year house growth+7.5%estimate+3.4%estimate
3-year house growth--
Vacancy rate0.9%1.6%
Population5,0015,833

Hurlstone Park vs Oatlands: what the numbers say

Houses cost about the same in both suburbs: the median house price is $2.5M in Hurlstone Park and $2.5M in Oatlands.

For units, Hurlstone Park sits at a median of $845K against $1.2M in Oatlands, which makes Hurlstone Park the more affordable unit market and Oatlands the pricier one.

Over the past year house prices moved +7.5% in Hurlstone Park (an estimate) and +3.4% in Oatlands (an estimate), so recent momentum favours Hurlstone Park, although both suburbs recorded growth.

Rental vacancy is 0.9% in Hurlstone Park and 1.6% in Oatlands, so landlords in Hurlstone Park face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.

Oatlands is the bigger suburb, with a population of 5,833 against 5,001, larger than Hurlstone Park; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Hurlstone Park for recent price momentum, Hurlstone Park 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