Back to results

Alice Springs vs Stuart Park — which is best for growth?

Same eight metrics, scored against the same benchmark, ranked against a $1.20Mbudget. Look for where one suburb is materially ahead — that's the dimension that should sway your call.

  1. Alice Springs

    NT · 0870
    23Below trend
    Median
    $545k
    5y growth
    4.4%/yr
    BalancedThin market · ~0.2k residents

  2. Stuart Park

    NT · 0820
    40Below trend
    Median
    $745k
    5y growth
    3.8%/yr
    BalancedLate-cycle hold

Metric breakdown

Each row scores 0–100 against a fixed benchmark. The leader on each row is highlighted.

Metric · weight
Alice Springs
Stuart Park
Capital growth (5y)
weight 22%
444.4%/yr
383.8%/yr
Rental yield
weight 13%
603.0%
562.8%
Rental demand
weight 10%
402.4%
382.5%
Population growth
weight 12%
717.1%
717.1%
Income growth
weight 12%
4010.0%
4812.0%
Construction pipeline
weight 15%
0–
0–
Affordability
weight 8%
5555% under cap
3838% under cap
Supply tightening
weight 8%
30+4.0% YoY
40+2.0% YoY

Winner per dimension

Where each suburb leads the field, with the count of dimensions won.

  1. Alice Springs

    4/8
    • Capital growth (5y)
    • Rental yield
    • Rental demand
    • Affordability

  2. Stuart Park

    2/8
    • Income growth
    • Supply tightening

Why Alice Springs

Thin market · ~0.2k residents

population +7.1% (5y), 3.0% gross yield.

Drivers
  • Population growth+7.1% (5y)
Risks
  • Only 231 residents — illiquid, slow to sell
  • No major construction project in this state

Why Stuart Park

Late-cycle hold

population +7.1% (5y), 2.8% gross yield.

Drivers
  • Population growth+7.1% (5y)
Risks
  • Modest 5y growth (3.8%/yr)
  • No major construction project in this state