Kingston vs Thirlstane
Property investment comparison - Kingston, TAS 7050 vs Thirlstane, TAS 7307
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Kingston wins 0, Thirlstane 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 | Kingston | Thirlstane |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $800K | $790K |
| Median unit price | $615K | - |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 4.23% | 4.39% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | 4.62% | - |
| 1-year house growth | +8.4%estimate | - |
| 3-year house growth | - | - |
| Vacancy rate | 1.0% | 1.0% |
| Population | 12,288 | 108 |
Kingston vs Thirlstane: what the numbers say
The median house price is $800K in Kingston and $790K in Thirlstane, so Thirlstane is the cheaper entry point, with Kingston houses about 1% dearer.
On cash flow, Thirlstane leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 4.39%, compared with 4.23% in Kingston, a gap of 0.16 percentage points.
Rental vacancy is the same in both, at 1.0%.
Kingston is the bigger suburb, with a population of 12,288 against 108, roughly 114 times the size of Thirlstane; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Thirlstane for rental income, Thirlstane for a lower purchase price. 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