Back to results

Palmerston vs Bakewell — which is best for yield?

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. Palmerston

    NT · 0830
    54Average
    Median
    $545k
    5y growth
    5.8%/yr
    YieldStable entry · room to scale

  2. Bakewell

    NT · 0832
    50Average
    Median
    $595k
    5y growth
    5.8%/yr
    BalancedStable entry · room to scale

Metric breakdown

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

Metric · weight
Palmerston
Bakewell
Capital growth (5y)
weight 22%
585.8%/yr
585.8%/yr
Rental yield
weight 13%
1006.2%
663.3%
Rental demand
weight 10%
502.0%
502.0%
Population growth
weight 12%
717.1%
717.1%
Income growth
weight 12%
5614.0%
5614.0%
Construction pipeline
weight 15%
0–
0–
Affordability
weight 8%
5555% under cap
5050% under cap
Supply tightening
weight 8%
500.0% YoY
500.0% YoY

Winner per dimension

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

  1. Palmerston

    2/8
    • Rental yield
    • Affordability

  2. Bakewell

    0/8

    No outright lead on any single dimension.

Why Palmerston

Stable entry · room to scale

6.2% gross yield, population +7.1% (5y).

Drivers
  • Rental yield6.2%
  • Population growth+7.1% (5y)
Risks
  • No major construction project in this state

Why Bakewell

Stable entry · room to scale

population +7.1% (5y), 3.3% gross yield.

Drivers
  • Population growth+7.1% (5y)
  • Rental yield3.3%
Risks
  • No major construction project in this state