Riverglen vs Seaford Heights
Property investment comparison - Riverglen, SA 5253 vs Seaford Heights, SA 5169
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Riverglen wins 1, Seaford Heights wins 2. 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 | Riverglen | Seaford Heights |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $910K | $900K |
| Median unit price | - | $620K |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 3.23% | 3.87% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | - | 4.69% |
| 1-year house growth | - | +10.3% |
| 3-year house growth | - | +17.3% |
| Vacancy rate | 1.5% | 1.5% |
| Population | 19 | 1,079 |
Riverglen vs Seaford Heights: what the numbers say
The median house price is $910K in Riverglen and $900K in Seaford Heights, so Seaford Heights is the cheaper entry point, with Riverglen houses about 1% dearer.
On cash flow, Seaford Heights leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 3.87%, compared with 3.23% in Riverglen, a gap of 0.64 percentage points.
Rental vacancy is the same in both, at 1.5%.
Seaford Heights is the bigger suburb, with a population of 1,079 against 19, roughly 57 times the size of Riverglen; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Seaford Heights for rental income, Seaford Heights for a lower purchase price. Which matters more depends on whether the investor is buying for cash flow, capital growth or affordability.
Full profile
Seaford Heights, SA 5169
Open Seaford Heights suburb profileRecent sales in Seaford Heights
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