Skip to main content

Milabena vs Sheffield

Property investment comparison - Milabena, TAS 7325 vs Sheffield, TAS 7306

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Milabena wins 1, Sheffield 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.

MetricMilabenaSheffield
Median house price$525K$520K
Median unit price--
Gross rental yield (houses)4.02%4.55%
Gross rental yield (units)-4.22%
1-year house growth+4.9%+0.0%
3-year house growth-+16.2%
Vacancy rate3.2%1.0%
Population771,602

Milabena vs Sheffield: what the numbers say

The median house price is $525K in Milabena and $520K in Sheffield, so Sheffield is the cheaper entry point, with Milabena houses about 1% dearer.

On cash flow, Sheffield leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 4.55%, compared with 4.02% in Milabena, a gap of 0.53 percentage points.

Over the past year house prices moved +4.9% in Milabena and +0.0% in Sheffield, so recent momentum favours Milabena, although both suburbs recorded growth.

Rental vacancy is 1.0% in Sheffield and 3.2% in Milabena, so landlords in Sheffield face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.

Sheffield is the bigger suburb, with a population of 1,602 against 77, roughly 21 times the size of Milabena; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Sheffield for rental income, Sheffield for a lower purchase price, Milabena for recent price momentum, Sheffield 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