Skip to main content

Smithfield vs Wallaroo

Property investment comparison - Smithfield, SA 5114 vs Wallaroo, SA 5556

Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Smithfield wins 1, Wallaroo 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.

MetricSmithfieldWallaroo
Median house price$655K$630K
Median unit price-$700K
Gross rental yield (houses)4.10%3.61%
Gross rental yield (units)4.85%-
1-year house growth+20.4%+22.9%estimate
3-year house growth+44.8%-
Vacancy rate0.7%0.5%
Population2,4823,699

Smithfield vs Wallaroo: what the numbers say

The median house price is $655K in Smithfield and $630K in Wallaroo, so Wallaroo is the cheaper entry point, with Smithfield houses about 4% dearer.

On cash flow, Smithfield leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 4.10%, compared with 3.61% in Wallaroo, a gap of 0.49 percentage points.

Over the past year house prices moved +20.4% in Smithfield and +22.9% in Wallaroo (an estimate), so recent momentum favours Wallaroo, although both suburbs recorded growth.

Rental vacancy is 0.5% in Wallaroo and 0.7% in Smithfield, so landlords in Wallaroo face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.

Wallaroo is the bigger suburb, with a population of 3,699 against 2,482, larger than Smithfield; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.

In short: Smithfield for rental income, Wallaroo for a lower purchase price, Wallaroo for recent price momentum, Wallaroo 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