Mapping Australia’s Best-Performing Suburbs

Mapping Australia’s Best-Performing Suburbs: An Investor Lens on SA2, SA3 and SA4 Markets

By Kent Lardner, Head of Research, FOUNDIT

Australian residential property markets are often discussed in broad, city-level terms. Median prices, annual growth rates and headline affordability metrics dominate the narrative. While these measures are useful, they frequently obscure the far more important reality for investors: property outcomes are driven at the suburb level, and increasingly by the interaction between local supply conditions, demand resilience and affordability constraints.

To address this, FOUNDIT has constructed a national investor map using the Australian Bureau of Statistics’ Statistical Area framework, specifically Statistical Area Level 2 (SA2), Level 3 (SA3) and Level 4 (SA4). This research applies a consistent, data-driven scoring model across every SA2 in the country, then identifies the strongest-performing SA2 within each SA4. The result is a national map that highlights where investor conditions are currently most compelling, while avoiding the distortions that arise when large cities or regions dominate analysis by sheer scale.

Why SA2, SA3 and SA4 matter

The ABS Statistical Area framework is designed to reflect how Australians live, work and interact with housing markets. Each level serves a distinct analytical purpose.

SA2s are the building blocks of suburb-level analysis. They generally represent communities of between 3,000 and 25,000 people and align closely with how buyers, renters and agents experience local housing markets. Sales turnover, days on market, yields and affordability pressures are most accurately observed at this level.

SA3s sit above SA2s and are intended to represent broader housing and labour market regions. They capture shared economic drivers, commuting patterns and, critically for investors, the balance between supply and demand across a wider area. Measures such as inventory, medium-term price cycles and growth trends are more stable and meaningful at the SA3 level than at individual suburb level.

SA4s represent large economic regions, often encompassing entire cities or major regional labour markets. They are particularly useful for comparing performance across the country without allowing large metropolitan areas to crowd out regional markets. By selecting one SA2 per SA4, this research ensures national coverage and comparability.

From raw data to an Investor Score

Every SA2 in Australia has been assessed using a multi-factor investor scoring model, producing a final score out of 100. The model is deliberately diversified, combining short-term market signals with longer-term structural indicators. No single metric dominates the outcome.

At the SA2 level, we assess Sales Days on Market, which acts as a real-time proxy for demand intensity and liquidity. Faster turnover typically signals stronger buyer competition and lower execution risk for investors. We also include Yield, Buy Affordability, Rent Affordability, Remoteness, Fully Owned Housing Share and Socio-economic indicators, all of which influence the stability of rental demand and downside risk through the cycle.

At the SA3 level, we incorporate Inventory, which measures how many months of supply are currently available. This is one of the most powerful indicators of future price pressure. Tight inventory below three months generally favours sellers and supports price momentum, while elevated inventory above five to seven months signals a shift toward buyers and more subdued price growth.

We also assess Growth Gap, One-Year Growth and Ten-Year Growth at the SA3 level. This combination allows us to understand not only where prices have been, but how current prices compare with long-term trend. Areas trading materially above trend carry greater downside risk, while those below trend with improving fundamentals often present better risk-adjusted opportunities.

The final Investor Score balances these inputs. A high score does not imply guaranteed growth, but rather a more favourable alignment of liquidity, supply, affordability and income support at this point in the cycle.

Selecting the best SA2 in every SA4

Once every SA2 had been scored, the next step was selection. Rather than ranking suburbs nationally and allowing Sydney and Melbourne to dominate the results, we selected the highest-scoring SA2 within each SA4. This approach ensures that every major economic region in Australia is represented, from inner-city capitals through to regional and remote markets.

Where multiple SA2s shared the same top score within an SA4, a transparent tie-break framework was applied. Preference was given to suburbs with lower SA3-level inventory, reflecting stronger supply discipline. Where ties remained, socio-economic ranking was used as a final differentiator, favouring areas with more resilient household profiles.

The outcome is a map that highlights one standout suburb per SA4, creating a clear national picture of where investor conditions are currently strongest, without over-concentration in any single city or state.

Why the map is the hero

The national map is central to this research. Rather than presenting a static list or table, the map allows investors to visualise opportunity spatially. It reveals patterns that are often missed in spreadsheet-driven analysis.

Several themes emerge immediately. Strong-scoring suburbs appear not only in capital cities, but across regional Australia. In many cases, these regional markets offer higher yields and better affordability, albeit with greater exposure to local economic drivers. Conversely, many inner-urban and middle-ring suburbs score well due to supply constraints and liquidity, even where yields are compressed.

The map also highlights the dispersion within cities. It is common to see one suburb within a metropolitan SA4 materially outperform neighbouring areas once supply, affordability and turnover are considered together. This reinforces the importance of suburb-level selection rather than city-level allocation.

What the scores tell us about the current cycle

At a national level, the distribution of scores suggests Australia is in a more nuanced phase of the property cycle. The post-pandemic surge has given way to conditions where supply, rather than demand alone, is the primary differentiator.

Many SA3 regions are now sitting in a balanced inventory range of three to five months. In these areas, price growth is likely to moderate but remain positive, supported by population growth and rental demand. Suburbs within these SA3s that also score well on affordability and yield continue to present reasonable risk-adjusted opportunities.

At the same time, several regions show inventory above seven months. In these markets, buyer choice has increased and price growth is likely to remain subdued over the next six to twelve months. High Investor Scores in these areas tend to be driven by income support and long-term value rather than near-term capital gains.

Conversely, pockets of very tight inventory persist, particularly in parts of Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane and select regional centres. In these locations, supply constraints continue to favour sellers, supporting price resilience even where affordability is stretched.

Using the map as an investor tool

The FOUNDIT map is not designed to be a list of “buy now” recommendations. Rather, it is a framework for prioritisation. Investors can use it to narrow the universe of suburbs to those with stronger underlying fundamentals, then apply their own strategy, risk tolerance and asset selection criteria.

For yield-focused investors, the map highlights regions where income returns remain comparatively strong and rental affordability supports ongoing demand. For growth-oriented investors, it identifies suburbs where supply discipline and liquidity remain favourable. For more defensive investors, it points to areas with higher owner-occupier presence and stronger socio-economic profiles.

Importantly, the map encourages investors to think beyond state borders. By applying the same methodology nationally, it becomes easier to compare opportunities in, say, regional South Australia with those in outer-metro Queensland or established suburbs in New South Wales.

Limitations and discipline

No model can eliminate risk. Property markets are influenced by policy changes, interest rates, local employment shocks and behavioural factors that are difficult to quantify. The Investor Score is best viewed as a screening tool, not a substitute for due diligence.

Data also operates with time lags. While days on market and inventory provide relatively timely signals, growth measures reflect past performance. Investors should therefore use the map alongside current market intelligence and local knowledge.

A more disciplined way to look at Australia

The key contribution of this research is discipline. By grounding analysis in the ABS Statistical Area framework and applying a consistent scoring methodology, it becomes possible to compare markets that are otherwise difficult to assess side by side.

Selecting the best-scoring SA2 in every SA4 creates a national snapshot of opportunity that is both comprehensive and restrained. It avoids the temptation to chase momentum in a handful of headline suburbs, instead highlighting where multiple fundamentals align.

In an environment where affordability constraints, supply dynamics and regional divergence are shaping outcomes more than ever, this approach offers investors a clearer lens through which to view Australia’s housing market. The map does not promise certainty, but it does provide structure, comparability and a starting point grounded in evidence rather than narrative.

For investors willing to engage at the suburb level, that discipline may prove to be the most valuable asset of all.