Skip to main content

Lane Cove vs Wareemba

Property investment comparison - Lane Cove, NSW 2066 vs Wareemba, NSW 2046

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Lane Cove wins 4, Wareemba wins 1. 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.

MetricLane CoveWareemba
Median house price$3.2M$3.3M
Median unit price$975K$1.5M
Gross rental yield (houses)2.09%2.02%
Gross rental yield (units)--
1-year house growth-5.5%+7.9%
3-year house growth+5.1%+4.1%
Vacancy rate1.1%1.1%
Population12,3631,519

Lane Cove vs Wareemba: what the numbers say

The median house price is $3.2M in Lane Cove and $3.3M in Wareemba, so Lane Cove is the cheaper entry point, with Wareemba houses about 2% dearer.

For units, Lane Cove sits at a median of $975K against $1.5M in Wareemba, which makes Lane Cove the more affordable unit market and Wareemba the pricier one.

On cash flow, Lane Cove leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 2.09%, compared with 2.02% in Wareemba, a gap of 0.07 percentage points.

Over the past year house prices moved -5.5% in Lane Cove and +7.9% in Wareemba, so recent momentum favours Wareemba, while Lane Cove went backwards.

Looking back three years, Lane Cove houses are +5.1% and Wareemba houses +4.1%, so Lane Cove has compounded faster than Wareemba over the longer window.

Rental vacancy is the same in both, at 1.1%.

Lane Cove is the bigger suburb, with a population of 12,363 against 1,519, roughly 8 times the size of Wareemba; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Lane Cove for rental income, Lane Cove for a lower purchase price, Wareemba for recent price momentum. 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