If you’ve bought or sold property in Sydney recently, you’ve probably checked both PropTrack and CoreLogic. Maybe you got two different numbers and wondered which one to trust. You’re not alone — it’s one of the most common questions I get from clients.

So I did something about it. Over the past three months, I tracked automated valuation estimates from both platforms across 15 Sydney suburbs, then compared them against actual sale results. It’s not a perfect study — I’m a real estate agent, not a statistician — but the patterns were revealing.

The methodology (keeping it simple)

I selected 15 suburbs spread across Sydney: five in the Eastern Suburbs and Inner West (high value, high turnover), five in the North Shore and Northern Beaches (mixed), and five in the South-West and West (more affordable, higher volume).

For each suburb, I took the PropTrack and CoreLogic automated valuation estimates for 10 properties that sold at auction or private treaty between November 2025 and January 2026. That gave me 150 data points — enough to spot trends, not enough to be definitive.

I compared each platform’s estimate to the actual sale price and calculated the median percentage deviation for each suburb.

The headline results

Neither platform was consistently more accurate across all suburbs. But there were clear patterns.

PropTrack was closer in high-turnover suburbs. In areas like Marrickville, Newtown, and Parramatta — where there are lots of comparable sales — PropTrack estimates were within 4-6% of actual sale prices on average. CoreLogic was typically 6-9% off in the same suburbs.

My theory: PropTrack’s model seems to weight recent comparable sales more heavily, which gives it an edge in suburbs with lots of data points.

CoreLogic was closer in premium, low-turnover suburbs. In places like Mosman, Vaucluse, and Manly — where sales are less frequent and properties are more unique — CoreLogic performed better, typically within 7-10% versus PropTrack’s 10-15%.

This makes sense. CoreLogic has been in the Australian market longer and has deeper historical data, which matters more when recent comparable sales are scarce.

Both struggled with unusual properties. Anything that deviated from the suburb norm — a knockdown on a large block, a heritage-listed terrace, a property with significant development potential — threw both platforms off by 15% or more. No surprise there. Automated valuations are designed for typical properties, not outliers.

Suburb-by-suburb highlights

Here are some of the more interesting findings:

Marrickville. PropTrack median deviation: 4.2%. CoreLogic median deviation: 7.8%. PropTrack was clearly better here, probably because the high volume of terrace and semi-detached sales gives the algorithm plenty of comparable data.

Mosman. PropTrack median deviation: 12.1%. CoreLogic median deviation: 8.3%. CoreLogic’s advantage in premium markets was evident. The properties in Mosman are more heterogeneous — a waterfront mansion and a garden apartment are very different products, and CoreLogic seemed better at distinguishing them.

Liverpool. PropTrack median deviation: 5.5%. CoreLogic median deviation: 5.8%. Effectively a draw. High-volume, relatively homogeneous housing stock meant both platforms had plenty to work with.

Manly. PropTrack median deviation: 11.7%. CoreLogic median deviation: 7.9%. Another win for CoreLogic in a premium coastal suburb.

Redfern. PropTrack median deviation: 3.8%. CoreLogic median deviation: 6.2%. PropTrack’s best result in my sample. Redfern’s rapid gentrification and high sales volume seem to suit their model.

What this means for buyers and sellers

If you’re buying: Check both platforms, but don’t treat either number as gospel. They’re starting points for research, not substitutes for a professional appraisal. In a suburb like Redfern, PropTrack will give you a better ballpark. In Mosman, lean toward CoreLogic.

If you’re selling: Be wary of agents who use automated valuations to justify their price guide. Any decent agent should be doing a comparative market analysis based on actual recent sales of similar properties, not pulling a number from a website. If an agent’s appraisal differs significantly from both automated estimates, ask them to explain why — they might have a good reason, or they might be trying to buy the listing with an inflated price.

If you’re refinancing: Banks use their own automated valuation models, which draw from similar data sources but apply different methodologies. The bank’s estimate might differ from both PropTrack and CoreLogic. If the bank’s valuation comes in low and you disagree, you can request a full valuation — it’s worth the $300-500 if the difference affects your loan terms.

The bigger picture

The quality of automated property valuations has improved significantly over the past five years. Both PropTrack and CoreLogic have invested heavily in their models, and for standard properties in high-volume suburbs, they’re genuinely useful.

But they’re not replacing human judgment anytime soon. Property valuation isn’t just about data — it’s about understanding the intangibles. The renovation quality. The neighbour’s barking dog. The development application lodged for the block next door. The fact that the living room faces west and gets brutally hot in summer.

Data is one input. Experience is another. The best property decisions come from combining both.

My recommendation

Use PropTrack for a quick check in suburbs with high sales volume. Use CoreLogic when you’re looking at premium or low-turnover suburbs where historical depth matters more. Use both when you’re making a significant financial decision.

And then talk to a local agent who actually knows the street. Because no algorithm — no matter how sophisticated — has walked through the front door.

That’s still worth something.