Back to results

Ashford vs Cobar — which is best for yield?

Same eight metrics, scored against the same benchmark, ranked against a $400kbudget. Look for where one suburb is materially ahead — that's the dimension that should sway your call.

  1. Ashford

    NSW · 2361
    25Below trend
    Median
    $220k
    5y growth
    5.0%/yr
    YieldThin market · ~0.7k residents

  2. Cobar

    NSW · 2835
    33Below trend
    Median
    $345k
    5y growth
    5.0%/yr
    BalancedThin market · ~4k residents

Metric breakdown

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

Metric · weight
Ashford
Cobar
Capital growth (5y)
weight 22%
505.0%/yr
505.0%/yr
Rental yield
weight 13%
874.4%
603.0%
Rental demand
weight 10%
352.6%
352.6%
Population growth
weight 12%
656.5%
656.5%
Income growth
weight 12%
5213.0%
5213.0%
Construction pipeline
weight 15%
0–
0–
Affordability
weight 8%
4545% under cap
1414% under cap
Supply tightening
weight 8%
20+6.0% YoY
20+6.0% YoY

Winner per dimension

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

  1. Ashford

    2/8
    • Rental yield
    • Affordability

  2. Cobar

    0/8

    No outright lead on any single dimension.

Why Ashford

Thin market · ~0.7k residents

4.4% gross yield, population +6.5% (5y).

Drivers
  • Rental yield4.4%
  • Population growth+6.5% (5y)
Risks
  • Only 659 residents — illiquid, slow to sell
  • Listings up 6.0% YoY — supply easing

Construction ·Sydney Metro West — Parramatta499.6 kmConstruction · 2030

Why Cobar

Thin market · ~4k residents

population +6.5% (5y), 3.0% gross yield.

Drivers
  • Population growth+6.5% (5y)
  • Rental yield3.0%
Risks
  • Only 3,603 residents — illiquid, slow to sell
  • Listings up 6.0% YoY — supply easing

Construction ·Sydney Metro — Western Sydney Airport529.5 kmConstruction · 2026