Millner vs Nightcliff vs Stuart Park — 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.

Millner
NT · 0810
44Below trend
Median
$595k
5y growth
4.8%/yr
BalancedStable entry point
Nightcliff
NT · 0810
39Below trend
Median
$745k
5y growth
4.0%/yr
BalancedGrowth-led, low cashflow
Stuart Park
NT · 0820
38Below trend
Median
$745k
5y growth
3.8%/yr
BalancedLate-cycle hold

Metric breakdown

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

Metric · weight

Millner

Nightcliff

Stuart Park

Capital growth (5y)

weight 22%

484.8%/yr

404.0%/yr

383.8%/yr

Rental yield

weight 13%

593.0%

492.4%

562.8%

Rental demand

weight 10%

452.2%

382.5%

Population growth

weight 12%

717.1%

Income growth

weight 12%

5213.0%

4812.0%

Construction pipeline

weight 15%

0–

Affordability

weight 8%

3434% under cap

1717% under cap

Supply tightening

weight 8%

45+1.0% YoY

40+2.0% YoY

Winner per dimension

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

Millner
3/8
- Capital growth (5y)
- Rental yield
- Affordability
Nightcliff
0/8
No outright lead on any single dimension.
Stuart Park
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 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 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