Suburb comparison
FLAGSTAFF GULLY vs TINDERBOX
It's close — they're well matched overall.
| Metric | FLAGSTAFF GULLY TAS 7015 | TINDERBOX TAS 7054 |
|---|---|---|
| Investor score | 56 | 57✓ |
| Liveability score | 56 | 58✓ |
| Median price | $835,000✓ | $860,000 |
| Median rent | $400/wk | $375/wk |
| Rental yield | 2.5%✓ | 2.3% |
| Annual growth | 3.0% | 3.0% |
| Vacancy rate | 1.7%✓ | 2.0% |
| Avg. school ICSEA | 1017 | 1037✓ |
| Safety index | 48 | 64✓ |
| Walkability | 15✓ | 0 |
| Transit score | 95 | 95 |
Full profile: FLAGSTAFF GULLY, TAS
50 data fields, schools, map, demographics & risk
Full profile: TINDERBOX, TAS
50 data fields, schools, map, demographics & risk
Median sale prices are real for TAS (modelled) and TAS (modelled); rents are real for . Other figures may be modelled estimates — see Real/Est. labels on each suburb page. Not financial advice.