Skip to main content

Metford vs Worrowing Heights

Property investment comparison - Metford, NSW 2323 vs Worrowing Heights, NSW 2540

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Metford wins 4, Worrowing Heights 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.

MetricMetfordWorrowing Heights
Median house price$820K$820K
Median unit price$540K$625K
Gross rental yield (houses)4.15%3.98%
Gross rental yield (units)4.65%3.79%
1-year house growth+12.1%-
3-year house growth+21.5%-
Vacancy rate0.4%2.4%
Population4,707713

Metford vs Worrowing Heights: what the numbers say

Houses cost about the same in both suburbs: the median house price is $820K in Metford and $820K in Worrowing Heights.

For units, Metford sits at a median of $540K against $625K in Worrowing Heights, which makes Metford the more affordable unit market and Worrowing Heights the pricier one.

On cash flow, Metford leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 4.15%, compared with 3.98% in Worrowing Heights, a gap of 0.17 percentage points.

Rental vacancy is 0.4% in Metford and 2.4% in Worrowing Heights, so landlords in Metford face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.

Metford is the bigger suburb, with a population of 4,707 against 713, roughly 7 times the size of Worrowing Heights; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Metford for rental income, Metford 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