Kingscliff vs Wrights Beach
Property investment comparison - Kingscliff, NSW 2487 vs Wrights Beach, NSW 2540
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Kingscliff wins 2, Wrights Beach 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 | Kingscliff | Wrights Beach |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $1.9M | $1.9M |
| Median unit price | $1.0M | $625K |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 3.45% | 1.74% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | 4.44% | 4.49% |
| 1-year house growth | +2.6% | - |
| 3-year house growth | +2.7% | - |
| Vacancy rate | 2.8% | 3.3% |
| Population | 8,355 | 137 |
Kingscliff vs Wrights Beach: what the numbers say
Houses cost about the same in both suburbs: the median house price is $1.9M in Kingscliff and $1.9M in Wrights Beach.
For units, Kingscliff sits at a median of $1.0M against $625K in Wrights Beach, which makes Wrights Beach the more affordable unit market and Kingscliff the pricier one.
On cash flow, Kingscliff leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 3.45%, compared with 1.74% in Wrights Beach, a gap of 1.71 percentage points.
Rental vacancy is 2.8% in Kingscliff and 3.3% in Wrights Beach, so landlords in Kingscliff face less competition for tenants.
Kingscliff is the bigger suburb, with a population of 8,355 against 137, roughly 61 times the size of Wrights Beach; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Kingscliff for rental income, Kingscliff 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