Back to results

Driver vs Macgregor — which is best for growth?

Same eight metrics, scored against the same benchmark, ranked against a $800kbudget. Look for where one suburb is materially ahead — that's the dimension that should sway your call.

  1. Driver

    NT · 0830
    51Average
    Median
    $495k
    5y growth
    6.2%/yr
    BalancedStable entry point

  2. Macgregor

    ACT · 2615
    58Average
    Median
    $695k
    5y growth
    8.2%/yr
    BalancedStable entry point

Metric breakdown

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

Metric · weight
Driver
Macgregor
Capital growth (5y)
weight 22%
626.2%/yr
828.2%/yr
Rental yield
weight 13%
743.7%
693.5%
Rental demand
weight 10%
502.0%
651.4%
Population growth
weight 12%
717.1%
919.1%
Income growth
weight 12%
5614.0%
6416.0%
Construction pipeline
weight 15%
0–
0–
Affordability
weight 8%
3838% under cap
1313% under cap
Supply tightening
weight 8%
500.0% YoY
65-3.0% YoY

Winner per dimension

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

  1. Driver

    2/8
    • Rental yield
    • Affordability

  2. Macgregor

    5/8
    • Capital growth (5y)
    • Rental demand
    • Population growth
    • Income growth
    • Supply tightening

Why Driver

Stable entry point

3.7% gross yield, population +7.1% (5y).

Drivers
  • Rental yield3.7%
  • Population growth+7.1% (5y)
  • Capital growth6.2%/yr
Risks
  • No major construction project in this state

Why Macgregor

Stable entry point

population +9.1% (5y), 8.2%/yr capital growth.

Drivers
  • Population growth+9.1% (5y)
  • Capital growth8.2%/yr
  • Rental yield3.5%
  • Tight rentals1.4%
Risks
  • No major construction project in this state