What Sydney did
The June quarter was the worst of this cycle for Sydney.
Cotality recorded Sydney dwelling values down 3.2% over the quarter and down 1.2% in June alone, the sharpest decline of any capital city. The national index fell 0.4% in June, its largest monthly drop since December 2022. Sydney finished the financial year down 3.7%, and sales volumes ran about 26% below the same period a year earlier.
Two forces are doing most of that. Borrowing capacity is constrained with the cash rate at 4.35%, and investors have pulled back ahead of the negative gearing and capital gains changes. Both bite hardest at premium price points, where serviceability is most stretched.
That is the water we are all swimming in this quarter. It is worth stating plainly, because a market update that tells you demand is unprecedented when the city just posted its worst quarter in years is not an update, it is marketing.
What Hunters Hill did
Houses in the area fell 1.62% over the quarter according to Your Investment Property, and 2.17% according to Smart Property Investment. Over twelve months the range runs from down 0.9% to down 4.01% depending on who you ask.
So the area fell, and it fell by roughly a point and a half less than Sydney overall. In a quarter where the city dropped 3.2%, that is the scarcity argument doing exactly what it is supposed to do.
Here is the awkward part. I cannot give you a clean Hunters Hill median for April to June, and neither can anybody else, because no provider publishes one. Every figure below is a twelve month rolling median to around May 2026, with the quarterly movement reported separately. On a suburb this small, three months of sales is not enough to calculate a median anyone should rely on.
Which brings me to the number everybody asks for.
The median, and why five sources give five answers
For the same suburb, over broadly the same period:
OpenAgent $4,180,000
Smart Property Investment $4,500,000
Your Investment Property $4,550,000
Cotality via Property Value $4,600,000
Allhomes $5,000,000
That is an $820,000 spread on the same question. Twenty per cent.
Domain does not publish a single median at all. It reports by bedroom count, which is more honest: three bedroom houses at $3.15m, four bedroom at $4m, five bedroom at $5.7625m.
None of these sources is wrong. They are measuring slightly different windows with slightly different methods, and when a suburb produces around 100 house sales a year, small differences in method move the answer a long way. Two waterfront results landing inside one provider's window and outside another's is enough to explain most of that gap.
If you take one thing from this update, take that. Your home is not worth the median. It is worth what a buyer will pay for your land, your aspect, your frontage and your approvals history, and the only way to find that number is comparable sales.
How thin the market actually is
Around 102 to 105 houses sold in Hunters Hill across the twelve months. OpenAgent recorded 25 house sales in the most recent three months. That is about 8.5 sales a month across the entire suburb.
Woolwich is starker. Five house sales in twelve months. Your Investment Property publishes no median, no quarterly growth and no annual growth for it because there is not enough data to produce them.
This is what tightly held means in practice. When a Woolwich owner asks me what their home is worth, the honest answer involves sales from other streets and other years, and a conversation about which of them are actually comparable.
Days on market ran between 38 and 63 depending on the source, which again is a methodology difference: some measure days advertised, others days to exchange. Domain has four bedroom houses at 51 days and five bedroom at 33.
Gladesville went the other way
While Hunters Hill houses fell, Gladesville rose 0.83% for the quarter and 1.67% over twelve months, to a median of $3,050,000. It recorded 113 house sales and 193 unit sales.
That is more transactions in Gladesville than in Hunters Hill and Woolwich combined, in a market a third cheaper. And it is the more reliable median of the two, precisely because it trades often enough to produce one.
The divergence makes sense. Gladesville sits at a price point where borrowing capacity still works. Hunters Hill sits at one where it is the binding constraint. In a quarter driven by serviceability, the cheaper end of the market was always going to hold better.
The unit numbers are not usable
I am including this because it illustrates the point better than anything else I could write.
Over twelve months, Hunters Hill units were reported at up 31.53% by one provider, up 19.42% by another, and down 22.2% by a third. Medians ranged from $880,000 to $1,533,000.
Roughly 38 units sell here in a year. At that volume, the composition of who happened to sell moves the median more than the market does. If anyone quotes you a Hunters Hill unit growth figure, ask them how many sales it is built on.
What I would tell an owner right now
Three things.
Hunters Hill outperformed Sydney this quarter and it still went backwards. If you are pricing off what your neighbour achieved in 2024, that number has moved.
Buyer depth is the thing to watch, not the median. In a market where borrowing capacity is the constraint, the buyer who can actually complete at your number is rarer than the buyer who admires the house. Campaigns have to find that specific person, which is where TRG's database earns its place.
Method matters more in a falling market. Where comparable sales are thin, competition on the day still finds the price better than an appraisal can. Where they are recent and clear, a defensible asking price and a controlled private treaty usually holds more of the value than an auction with three registered bidders.
Sources: Cotality Home Value Index, June and July 2026. Your Investment Property, Smart Property Investment, OpenAgent, Property Value and Domain suburb data, twelve months to May 2026. Figures were current at 13 August 2026 and will move.

