Millner vs Stuart Park vs Wagaman — which is best for growth?

Same eight metrics, scored against the same benchmark, ranked against a $900kbudget. Look for where one suburb is materially ahead — that's the dimension that should sway your call.

Millner
NT · 0810
44Below trend
Median
$595k
5y growth
4.8%/yr
BalancedStable entry point
Stuart Park
NT · 0820
38Below trend
Median
$745k
5y growth
3.8%/yr
BalancedLate-cycle hold
Wagaman
NT · 0810
44Below trend
Median
$595k
5y growth
4.8%/yr
BalancedStable entry point

Metric breakdown

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

Metric · weight

Millner

Stuart Park

Wagaman

Capital growth (5y)

weight 22%

484.8%/yr

383.8%/yr

484.8%/yr

Rental yield

weight 13%

593.0%

562.8%

593.0%

Rental demand

weight 10%

452.2%

382.5%

452.2%

Population growth

weight 12%

717.1%

Income growth

weight 12%

5213.0%

4812.0%

5213.0%

Construction pipeline

weight 15%

0–

Affordability

weight 8%

3434% under cap

1717% under cap

3434% under cap

Supply tightening

weight 8%

45+1.0% YoY

40+2.0% YoY

45+1.0% YoY

Winner per dimension

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

Millner
0/8
No outright lead on any single dimension.
Stuart Park
0/8
No outright lead on any single dimension.
Wagaman
0/8
No outright lead on any single dimension.

Why Millner

Stable entry point

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

Drivers

Population growth+7.1% (5y)

Risks

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

Why Wagaman

Stable entry point

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

Drivers

Population growth+7.1% (5y)

Risks

No major construction project in this state