Skip to main content

Regentville vs Schofields

Property investment comparison - Regentville, NSW 2745 vs Schofields, NSW 2762

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Regentville wins 2, Schofields 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.

MetricRegentvilleSchofields
Median house price$1.3M$1.3M
Median unit price$750K$620K
Gross rental yield (houses)2.66%3.30%
Gross rental yield (units)4.56%5.44%
1-year house growth+10.2%estimate+4.2%
3-year house growth--3.0%
Vacancy rate2.8%3.5%
Population82915,213

Regentville vs Schofields: what the numbers say

Houses cost about the same in both suburbs: the median house price is $1.3M in Regentville and $1.3M in Schofields.

For units, Regentville sits at a median of $750K against $620K in Schofields, which makes Schofields the more affordable unit market and Regentville the pricier one.

On cash flow, Schofields leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 3.30%, compared with 2.66% in Regentville, a gap of 0.64 percentage points.

Over the past year house prices moved +10.2% in Regentville (an estimate) and +4.2% in Schofields, so recent momentum favours Regentville, although both suburbs recorded growth.

Rental vacancy is 2.8% in Regentville and 3.5% in Schofields, so landlords in Regentville face less competition for tenants.

Schofields is the bigger suburb, with a population of 15,213 against 829, roughly 18 times the size of Regentville; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Schofields for rental income, Regentville for recent price momentum, Regentville 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