Back to results

Gunn vs Tuart Hill — 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.

  1. Gunn

    NT · 0832
    49Average
    Median
    $645k
    5y growth
    5.8%/yr
    BalancedStable entry point

  2. Tuart Hill

    WA · 6060
    63Strong
    Median
    $845k
    5y growth
    9.8%/yr
    GrowthStable but fully priced

Metric breakdown

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

Metric · weight
Gunn
Tuart Hill
Capital growth (5y)
weight 22%
585.8%/yr
989.8%/yr
Rental yield
weight 13%
773.9%
392.0%
Rental demand
weight 10%
502.0%
751.0%
Population growth
weight 12%
717.1%
10012.6%
Income growth
weight 12%
5614.0%
7218.0%
Construction pipeline
weight 15%
0–
0–
Affordability
weight 8%
2828% under cap
66% under cap
Supply tightening
weight 8%
500.0% YoY
95-9.0% YoY

Winner per dimension

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

  1. Gunn

    2/8
    • Rental yield
    • Affordability

  2. Tuart Hill

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

Why Gunn

Stable entry point

3.9% gross yield, population +7.1% (5y).

Drivers
  • Rental yield3.9%
  • Population growth+7.1% (5y)
Risks
  • No major construction project in this state

Why Tuart Hill

Stable but fully priced

population +12.6% (5y), 9.8%/yr capital growth.

Drivers
  • Population growth+12.6% (5y)
  • Capital growth9.8%/yr
  • Supply tightening-9.0% YoY
  • Tight rentals1.0%
Risks
  • At top of budget (94% of cap)
  • Thin gross yield (2.0%)