Back to results

Nightcliff vs Katherine — which is best for yield?

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.

  1. Nightcliff

    NT · 0810
    39Below trend
    Median
    $745k
    5y growth
    4.0%/yr
    BalancedGrowth-led, low cashflow

  2. Katherine

    NT · 0850
    26Below trend
    Median
    $445k
    5y growth
    4.8%/yr
    YieldThin market · ~1.3k residents

Metric breakdown

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

Metric · weight
Nightcliff
Katherine
Capital growth (5y)
weight 22%
404.0%/yr
484.8%/yr
Rental yield
weight 13%
492.4%
844.2%
Rental demand
weight 10%
452.2%
402.4%
Population growth
weight 12%
717.1%
717.1%
Income growth
weight 12%
5213.0%
4010.0%
Construction pipeline
weight 15%
0–
0–
Affordability
weight 8%
1717% under cap
5151% under cap
Supply tightening
weight 8%
45+1.0% YoY
30+4.0% YoY

Winner per dimension

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

  1. Nightcliff

    3/8
    • Rental demand
    • Income growth
    • Supply tightening

  2. Katherine

    3/8
    • Capital growth (5y)
    • Rental yield
    • Affordability

Why Nightcliff

Growth-led, low cashflow

population +7.1% (5y), incomes +13.0% (5y).

Drivers
  • Population growth+7.1% (5y)
Risks
  • Thin gross yield (2.4%)
  • No major construction project in this state

Why Katherine

Thin market · ~1.3k residents

4.2% gross yield, population +7.1% (5y).

Drivers
  • Rental yield4.2%
  • Population growth+7.1% (5y)
Risks
  • Only 1,254 residents — illiquid, slow to sell
  • No major construction project in this state