Faber Residence Pricing Review: One Of The Most Affordable Projects In D5 And Across The OCR

Clementi is often associated with its central hub around the MRT and mall, but Faber Walk sits in a very different sub-market: a landed enclave beside Sungei Ulu Pandan. Faber Residence capitalizes on this privacy and exclusivity, while also benefiting from its proximity to Nan Hua Primary and the wider D5 amenities.

In this pricing review, we’ll benchmark Faber Residence’s $PSF and quantum against District 5 peers, evaluate whether its landed-enclave positioning justifies the pricing, and assess potential exit strategies. Specifically, we’ll ask: will exclusivity and school proximity help it hold value, or will limited scale and transaction volume dampen its long-term resale prospects?

Quick Summary:

• At an indicative $1,995 psf, Faber Residence sits on the higher end locally, but its smaller unit sizes keep overall prices in the low-to-mid range.
  
• Among current new launches, Faber Residence is one of the most affordable projects both in D5 and across the OCR.
  
• Its unit mix leans toward three- and four-bedders, directly matching upgrader demand, while two-bedders still cater to younger buyers facing tight supply.

• Its land plot has a lower breakeven psf than nearby ELTA, giving the developer more room to price competitively while also holding the Nan Hua Primary School 1-km advantage.

Our key considerations when looking at Faber Residence’s pricing

These are the main issues we’ll take into consideration:

• D5 performance – How has D5 been doing across segments and tenures compared to the rest of the market?
• Relevant resale alternatives – Which resale condos sit within range of Faber’s launch prices, and have they been profitable?
• Nearest competitors – How Faber’s prices and layouts stack up against the closest current options.
• New launch context – Where Faber ranks among today’s launches, broken down by bedroom type.
• Exit strategies – Relevant supply and demand, as well as future developments nearby.

These are the current indicative prices for Faber Residence 

Unit type	Estimated size (sq ft)	Indicative starting price	Indicative starting $PSF
2 Bedroom	646	$1,290,000	$1,997
3 Bedroom	797 – 1,044	$1,590,000	$1,995
4 Bedroom	1,119 – 1,270	$2,390,000	$2,136
5 Bedroom	1,485	$3,190,000	$2,148

Let’s start by looking at condo performance in D5 in general

This takes into account all transaction types, for a quick snapshot. We’ll look at a 10-year transaction history:

All tenures

Year	D5	All non-landed private properties
2014	$1,269	$1,289
2015	$1,186	$1,180
2016	$1,218	$1,232
2017	$1,257	$1,304
2018	$1,430	$1,435
2019	$1,478	$1,560
2020	$1,536	$1,513
2021	$1,659	$1,600
2022	$1,633	$1,712
2023	$1,940	$1,869
2024	$1,857	$1,886
Annualised	3.88%	3.88%

Over the past decade, D5 has moved largely in step with the wider condo market. The annualised growth rate works out to 3.88 per cent, identical to the national average.

Now, let’s look specifically at 99-year leasehold condos in D5

Year	D5	All non-landed private properties
2014	$1,170	$1,195
2015	$1,184	$1,104
2016	$1,227	$1,166
2017	$1,256	$1,230
2018	$1,364	$1,359
2019	$1,499	$1,474
2020	$1,568	$1,453
2021	$1,689	$1,517
2022	$1,665	$1,595
2023	$1,908	$1,783
2024	$1,884	$1,854
Annualised	4.88%	4.49%

Leasehold condos in D5 moved almost exactly in tandem with the wider market, with a negligible difference of 4.88 versus 4.49 per cent. Faber Residence is leasehold, but that doesn’t appear to be an advantage or drawback in D5. 

999-year/freehold properties

Year	D5	All non-landed private properties
2014	$1,357	$1,505
2015	$1,192	$1,438
2016	$1,188	$1,470
2017	$1,275	$1,501
2018	$1,580	$1,617
2019	$1,330	$1,797
2020	$1,245	$1,688
2021	$1,364	$1,812
2022	$1,463	$1,995
2023	$2,030	$2,111
2024	$1,742	$2,003
Annualised	2.53%	2.90%

Freehold projects in D5 also move close to the wider market; but they lag by a small margin (2.53 per cent versus 2.9 per cent.) 

From this we can see leasehold has performed a little bit better for D5, even if it’s nothing to shout about; but it does mean buyers don’t have to worry about Faber Residence having a 99-year lease if they are looking at an exit in the near term. 

Now let’s compare the performance of D5 condos to the three regions: the CCR, RCR, and OCR

Let’s also compare it against the performance of the various regions

All tenures

Year	D5	CCR	RCR	OCR
2014	$1,269	$1,971	$1,408	$1,062
2015	$1,186	$1,846	$1,383	$1,010
2016	$1,218	$1,968	$1,390	$1,008
2017	$1,257	$1,940	$1,464	$1,053
2018	$1,430	$2,161	$1,594	$1,139
2019	$1,478	$2,294	$1,726	$1,225
2020	$1,536	$2,181	$1,681	$1,229
2021	$1,659	$2,318	$1,808	$1,252
2022	$1,633	$2,451	$1,893	$1,381
2023	$1,940	$2,512	$2,102	$1,518
2024	$1,857	$2,330	$2,159	$1,653
Annualised	3.88%	1.69%	4.37%	4.53%

From the above, we see that D5’s price movements are quite aligned with the RCR and OCR band (and below the CCR still.)

The standout year was 2023, when D5 jumped to $1,940 psf, effectively narrowing the gap with the RCR ($2,102) while remaining well ahead of the OCR ($1,518). This was due to the sharp uptick in prices following COVID. 

However, this involves all condos including freehold. So for a more precise look, we should separate the leasehold and freehold comparisons:

99-year leasehold properties

Year	D5	CCR	RCR	OCR
2014	$1,170	$2,073	$1,453	$1,025
2015	$1,184	$1,857	$1,417	$993
2016	$1,227	$2,106	$1,420	$999
2017	$1,256	$1,984	$1,509	$1,050
2018	$1,364	$2,153	$1,636	$1,139
2019	$1,499	$2,319	$1,739	$1,225
2020	$1,568	$2,226	$1,714	$1,222
2021	$1,689	$2,327	$1,873	$1,228
2022	$1,665	$2,311	$1,970	$1,354
2023	$1,908	$2,316	$2,186	$1,520
2024	$1,884	$2,312	$2,230	$1,661
Annualised	4.88%	1.10%	4.38%	4.95%

We see a mostly similar pattern. Over the past decade, D5 leasehold units mostly kept the same pace as the RCR and OCR. It’s also unsurprising that the CCR showed such low percentage gains, as projects in the CCR have a much higher base price. 

999-year/freehold properties

Year	D5	CCR	RCR	OCR
2014	$1,357	$1,940	$1,415	$1,261
2015	$1,192	$1,855	$1,320	$1,178
2016	$1,188	$1,896	$1,339	$1,135
2017	$1,275	$1,939	$1,404	$1,100
2018	$1,580	$2,203	$1,526	$1,161
2019	$1,330	$2,316	$1,715	$1,260
2020	$1,245	$2,182	$1,640	$1,238
2021	$1,364	$2,341	$1,690	$1,326
2022	$1,463	$2,551	$1,774	$1,518
2023	$2,030	$2,638	$1,948	$1,514
2024	$1,742	$2,371	$2,044	$1,597
Annualised	2.53%	2.03%	3.74%	2.39%

The results are a bit different from the leasehold segment. Here we see that 999-year/freehold projects managed to very slightly edge ahead of the OCR, unlike leasehold counterparts. But the margin is so slim (2.53 per cent in D5 versus 2.39 per cent in the OCR) that it’s not really significant. 

With that in mind, the next step is to look at the resale market today.

This will give us a clearer sense of how current resale prices compare to Faber Residence’s launch.

For this comparison, we will use resale and subsale transactions in its immediate vicinity. This will avoid distortions such as developer discount effects. 

We will use transactions recorded between 2024 and June 2025, focusing on nearby projects with largely similar unit sizes and layouts.

Project	Completion year	Tenure	No. of units	Unit mix	Avg size	Avg $PSF	Avg price	No. of tnx
FABER CREST	2001	99-year	360	2, 3, 4	1313	$1,232	$1,616,379	15
NEWEST	2016	956-year	136	1, 2, 3, 4	1566	$1,322	$1,857,211	8
REGENT PARK	1997	99-year	276	2, 3	1043	$1,355	$1,418,181	16
WATERFRONT @ FABER	2017	99-year	199 condos and 11 landed	2, 3, 4	936	$1,516	$1,421,626	19
THE INFINITI	2008	Freehold	315	2, 3, 4	1298	$1,566	$2,015,250	12
PARC RIVIERA	2019	99-year	752	1, 2, 3, 4	755	$1,662	$1,254,141	84
MONTEREY PARK CONDOMINIUM	2005	999-year	280	2, 3, 4	1397	$1,721	$2,397,111	8
BOTANNIA	2009	956-year	493	2, 3, 4	1363	$1,738	$2,366,566	21
HUNDRED TREES	2013	956-year	396	1, 2, 3, 4	1051	$1,760	$1,870,091	11
THE TRILINQ	2017	99-year	755	1, 2, 3, 4	1071	$1,764	$1,770,345	56
CARABELLE	2009	956-year	338	2, 3, 4, 5	1208	$1,789	$2,149,860	14
TWIN VEW	2021	99-year	520	1, 2, 3, 4, 5	956	$1,807	$1,735,146	44
THE PARC CONDOMINIUM	2010	Freehold	659	1, 2, 3, 4, 5	1353	$1,833	$2,438,690	33
WHISTLER GRAND	2022	99-year	716	1, 2, 3, 4, 5	765	$1,891	$1,448,586	84
THE CLEMENT CANOPY	2019	99-year	505	2, 3, 4	903	$1,915	$1,729,864	45
FABER RESIDENCE						Starting from $1,995
CLAVON	2024	99-year	640	1, 2, 3, 4, 5	854	$2,041	$1,751,690	118
PARC CLEMATIS	2023	99-year	1450 condos and 18 landed	1, 2, 3, 4, 5	820	$2,072	$1,718,962	176

The surrounding developments offer a good mix of 99-year and freehold options. We also see a fairly balanced unit mix in nearby projects; these range from compact one-bedders to larger four- and five-bedroom layouts. 

Next, we’ll break down our comparison for each unit size

2-bedroom units

Project	Avg $PSF	Avg price	No. of tnx
PARC RIVIERA	$1,637	$1,049,920	44
WATERFRONT @ FABER	$1,499	$1,104,432	9
NEWEST	$1,576	$1,149,229	3
REGENT PARK	$1,312	$1,195,875	8
FABER CREST	$1,212	$1,243,333	3
WHISTLER GRAND	$1,889	$1,274,626	41
FABER RESIDENCE		Starting from $1,290,000
THE CLEMENT CANOPY	$1,893	$1,297,810	21
TWIN VEW	$1,758	$1,310,688	16
PARC CLEMATIS	$2,012	$1,432,498	79
HUNDRED TREES	$1,703	$1,498,286	7
CLAVON	$2,008	$1,498,800	61
THE TRILINQ	$1,807	$1,503,549	16
BOTANNIA	$1,703	$1,540,000	2
THE INFINITI	$1,709	$1,570,000	3
CARABELLE	$1,823	$1,703,231	5
THE PARC CONDOMINIUM	$1,858	$1,820,000	3

3-bedroom units

Project	Avg $PSF	Avg price	No. of tnx
FABER CREST	$1,247	$1,575,076	9
PARC RIVIERA	$1,673	$1,586,651	13
FABER RESIDENCE		Starting from $1,590,000
REGENT PARK	$1,399	$1,640,486	8
WATERFRONT @ FABER	$1,553	$1,647,286	7
THE INFINITI	$1,465	$1,959,600	5
TWIN VEW	$1,844	$1,960,318	17
THE TRILINQ	$1,827	$1,974,231	25
WHISTLER GRAND	$1,965	$2,007,333	15
THE CLEMENT CANOPY	$1,942	$2,020,744	20
PARC CLEMATIS	$2,173	$2,079,790	56
CLAVON	$2,120	$2,125,582	27
CARABELLE	$1,774	$2,215,000	5
BOTANNIA	$1,743	$2,237,364	11
HUNDRED TREES	$1,829	$2,254,000	2
MONTEREY PARK CONDOMINIUM	$1,721	$2,397,111	8
THE PARC CONDOMINIUM	$1,896	$2,518,176	22

4-bedroom units

Project	Avg $PSF	Avg price	No. of tnx
WATERFRONT @ FABER	$1,486	$1,846,667	3
PARC RIVIERA	$1,679	$2,014,278	14
FABER CREST	$1,209	$2,113,333	3
WHISTLER GRAND	$1,850	$2,363,800	10
FABER RESIDENCE		Starting from $2,390,000
THE INFINITI	$1,585	$2,418,750	4
THE CLEMENT CANOPY	$1,891	$2,543,750	4
TWIN VEW	$1,843	$2,611,143	7
CARABELLE	$1,764	$2,626,722	4
NEWEST	$1,083	$2,652,500	4
BOTANNIA	$1,740	$2,750,861	8
HUNDRED TREES	$1,891	$2,787,500	2
CLAVON	$2,077	$2,926,643	14
PARC CLEMATIS	$2,228	$3,041,770	14
THE PARC CONDOMINIUM	$1,655	$3,265,378	5
THE TRILINQ	$1,379	$3,283,778	5

5-bedroom units

Project	Avg $PSF	Avg price	No. of tnx
FABER RESIDENCE		Starting from $3,190,000
PARC CLEMATIS	$2,005	$3,385,000	2

For two-bedroom units, the indicative entry price of $1.29 million puts Faber Residence in the mid-range: higher than older leasehold projects such as Regent Park or Faber Crest, but still below the averages at newer launches like Parc Clematis and Clavon, which cross $2,000 psf.

For three- and four-bedroom units, Faber Residence is cheaper than many resale peers; its older but larger neighbours tend to have a higher quantum. 

As for five-bedders, Faber Residence’s indicative $3.19 million is slightly below Parc Clematis ($3.385 million); the only close counterpart with units of this size. 

In short, Faber Residence’s two-bedroom units fall in the middle of the market, while the larger units are priced on the lower side compared to many resale alternatives.

Here’s how big the average units of each type are:

2-bedroom units

Project	Min. size (sqft)
PARC RIVIERA	603
WHISTLER GRAND	603
NEWEST	635
THE CLEMENT CANOPY	635
FABER RESIDENCE	Starting from 646
CLAVON	678
HUNDRED TREES	689
PARC CLEMATIS	689
WATERFRONT @ FABER	700
THE TRILINQ	700
TWIN VEW	710
REGENT PARK	807
BOTANNIA	818
CARABELLE	883
THE INFINITI	904
THE PARC CONDOMINIUM	980
FABER CREST	990
MONTEREY PARK CONDOMINIUM	1,023

3-bedroom units

Project	Min. size (sq ft)
FABER RESIDENCE	Starting from 797
PARC CLEMATIS	829
PARC RIVIERA	904
TWIN VEW	904
THE TRILINQ	915
WHISTLER GRAND	958
CLAVON	958
THE CLEMENT CANOPY	990
WATERFRONT @ FABER	1,023
HUNDRED TREES	1,044
REGENT PARK	1,130
CARABELLE	1,130
FABER CREST	1,141
BOTANNIA	1,163
NEWEST	1,195
THE PARC CONDOMINIUM	1,216
THE INFINITI	1,238
MONTEREY PARK CONDOMINIUM	1,249

4-bedroom units

Project	Min. size (sq ft)
FABER RESIDENCE	Starting from 1,119
PARC RIVIERA	1,152
WATERFRONT @ FABER	1,173
PARC CLEMATIS	1,238
TWIN VEW	1,238
WHISTLER GRAND	1,270
CLAVON	1,281
THE CLEMENT CANOPY	1,313
CARABELLE	1,389
BOTANNIA	1,464
HUNDRED TREES	1,475
THE PARC CONDOMINIUM	1,496
THE INFINITI	1,496
THE TRILINQ	1,518
FABER CREST	1,593
MONTEREY PARK CONDOMINIUM	1,625
NEWEST	2,400

5-bedroom units

Project	Min. size (sq ft)
WHISTLER GRAND	1,442
FABER RESIDENCE	Starting from 1,485
PARC CLEMATIS	1,636
CLAVON	1,690
TWIN VIEW	1,916
CARABELLE	2,034
THE PARC CONDOMINIUM	2,433

Faber Residence sports a lower quantum because its units tend to be smaller. So whilst the units are less spacious, they’re more accessible to many buyers; despite the higher $PSF. 

Among nearby developments, Parc Clematis stands out as the closest benchmark. 

It offers a wide spread of units with comparable sizes and pricing, and sits within the same one-kilometre radius of Nan Hua Primary. 

For most buyers weighing Faber Residence, Parc Clematis is the most direct point of comparison. So let’s examine how Parc Clematis has performed so far:

Parc Clematis’ profitability

The following includes all sub sale and resale transactions

Gains

Description	1BR	2BR	3BR	4BR	5BR	Entire Project (Average)
Average gains	$160,607	$266,173	$496,094	$717,660	$710,000	$470,107
Average purchase price	$771,667	$1,157,827	$1,540,453	$2,297,049	$2,677,500	$1,688,899
ROI	21.07%	23.08%	32.23%	31.56%	26.50%	26.89%
No. of tnx	42	113	86	18	4	266 (Total)
Average holding period (years)	4.5	4.0	3.8	3.4	3.4	3.8

Losses

Description	2BR	Entire Project (Average)
Average gains	-$25,000	-$25,000
Average purchase price	$1,430,000	$1,430,000
ROI	-1.75%	-1.75%
No. of tnx	1	1 (Total)
Average holding period (years)	3.3	3.3

So far, Parc Clematis has had only one unprofitable transaction; and that had a loss of less than two per cent. This loss was accompanied by an unusually shorter holding period, so we should consider this an outlier.

Among the various unit types, the three-bedders delivered the highest average ROI, followed closely by the four-bedders

Among the various unit types, the three-bedders delivered the highest average ROI, followed closely by the four-bedders. In general, the larger units achieved stronger returns than the smaller ones – not unsurprising given the family-oriented nature of Clementi. 

As Parc Clematis is such a close competitor, let’s examine its floor plans alongside Faber Residence 

The Parc Clematis unit is a two-bedroom, one-bath plus study, although the study is more of a nook than a full room. Its location beside the bathroom makes it versatile; it can work as a small home office, but more realistically functions as a walk-in closet or extra storage.

Faber Residence’s layout uses a dumbbell configuration, placing the bedrooms on opposite sides of the living area. Parc Clematis has a more conventional side-by-side layout. One notable difference is the common bathroom in Faber Residence, which is designed Jack and Jill style, giving both bedrooms ensuite access. This makes the apartment feel like a pair of ensuite rooms, rather than one master and one junior bedroom.

At Faber Residence, the dining area feels more spacious, as the kitchen is tucked into a corner, leaving more room for the dining area. In Parc Clematis the kitchen sits directly across from the dining, which reduces the separation.

Bedroom sizes are comparable, with both able to accommodate double beds comfortably, and each unit comes with a balcony off the living area.

Overall, Faber Residence’s layout offers more practical features for day-to-day use,  especially the second bathroom and more efficient kitchen positioning. While Parc Clematis has the extra study nook, it’s not quite enough to swing it in Parc Clematis’ favour. 

Both layouts are three-bedroom, two-bath units, but they differ significantly.

Faber Residence uses a dumbbell layout, with bedrooms flanking the living area, while Parc Clematis opts for a more conventional arrangement. In both units, the common bathroom is designed Jack and Jill style, effectively giving each apartment two ensuite bedrooms.

The living and dining areas are well segregated in both projects. Faber Residence includes a balcony off the living room, whereas Parc Clematis does not. Both kitchens are enclosed, but Parc Clematis may appeal more to those who cook frequently, as it has windows for better ventilation, as well as a glass separator from the dining area. The kitchen at Faber Residence has no ventilation window.

Bedroom sizes differ too. All three rooms at Faber Residence can comfortably fit a double bed. For Parc Clematis, one of the bedrooms is better suited to a single. 

Parc Clematis also has a small foyer at the main entrance, which offers more privacy compared to Faber Residence, where the entrance opens directly into the living and dining area.

Between the two, Faber Residence may have an edge in functionality: all bedrooms fit doubles, and some buyers may like balcony space. The lack of kitchen windows is a drawback though. In any case, Faber Residence’s lower entry prices – coupled with the efficiency – may swing buyers in its favour. 

Both units here are four-bedroom, two-bath layouts; but Faber Residence includes an additional powder room. 

In both projects, the common bathroom is Jack and Jill style, effectively giving each unit two ensuite bedrooms. Faber Residence opts for an enclosed kitchen, while Parc Clematis splits its kitchen into wet and dry zones. The Parc Clematis kitchen also comes with a yard, store, and WC, which provide added functionality for households with helpers or heavier cooking needs. Faber Residence has a home shelter, but it is located along the walkway toward the bedrooms; some buyers may prefer that these spaces be located next to, or within, kitchen areas. 

Faber Residence sees better separation between living and dining spaces, while Parc Clematis simply places them side by side. Both have balconies, but Parc Clematis’ spans the entire length of the living and dining area, while Faber Residence’s balcony is shorter, covering just the living room frontage.

All four bedrooms at Faber Residence can accommodate double beds, while one of Parc Clematis’ secondary bedrooms fits a single more comfortably. Both units also provide a small foyer at the entrance for added privacy.

Both layouts are comparably strong. Faber Residence’s additional powder room and more spacious bedrooms are a draw, while Parc Clematis’ wet and dry kitchen – along with the yard, store, and WC –  provide better functionality. Ultimately, it may come down to pricing.

The equivalent unit in Parc Clematis is still slightly larger. It is worth noting that this is the second-smallest five-bedder in Parc Clematis by the way; there have been no subsale or resale transactions for the smallest five-bedder yet.

Faber Residence offers a five-bedroom, three-bath layout with an additional powder room, while Parc Clematis has a five-bedroom, four-bath configuration. Both provide three ensuite bedrooms, and use dumbbell layouts.

The kitchens are where the biggest differences show. Faber Residence has a large kitchen with a yard, while Parc Clematis splits its kitchen into wet and dry zones, supplemented by a yard, store, and WC. 

Faber Residence includes a home shelter near the main entrance, which some buyers may not like. 

In terms of living areas, Faber Residence separates the living and dining spaces, whereas Parc Clematis positions them side by side. Both units feature long balconies: at Faber Residence, the balcony extends from the living room to an adjacent bedroom, while at Parc Clematis it spans the full length of the living and dining areas.

Bedroom sizing is generous in both layouts. All five rooms can fit double beds, with the master bedroom at Faber Residence standing out for its size: it accommodates a walk-in closet and even space for a study desk. 

The main entrance at Faber Residence opens to a foyer for added privacy, while Parc Clematis opens directly into the living and dining area.

Although the unit at Faber Residence lacks some of Parc Clematis’ functional add-ons, it still delivers a strong overall layout, with the advantage of spacious bedrooms and a standout master suite. 

If the price gap remains as wide as current numbers suggest, Faber Residence could be more attractive. 

Faber Residence in the context of recent new launches

Project	Tenure	District	Average $PSF for new sale transactions	Average developer’s profit margin (based on average $PSF)	Average quantum
Canberra Crescent Residences	99-year	27	$1,985	29.25%	$1,615,551
Faber Residence			Starting from $1,995
Springleaf Residence	99-year	26	$2,176	28.90%	$1,847,722
Lyndenwoods	99-year	5	$2,462	–	$2,262,991
Bloomsbury Residences	99-year	5	$2,503	20.57%	$1,927,345
ELTA	99-year	5	$2,548	18.18%	$2,090,020
Skye At Holland	99-year	10	Starting from $2,598
One Marina Gardens	99-year	1	$2,952	25.02%	$1,953,295
Aurea	99-year	7	$2,964	–	$3,318,410
Promenade Peak	99-year	9	$2,969	33.19%	$2,582,522
Arina East Residences	Freehold	15	$2,983	26.29%	$2,541,822
River Green	99-year	9	$3,120	38.19%	$2,007,283
Meyer Blue	Freehold	15	$3,230	–	$3,408,917
Upperhouse at Orchard	99-year	10	$3,305	–	$2,768,831
W Residences Marina View	99-year	1	$3,344	–	$3,417,500
The Robertson Opus	999-year	9	$3,356	–	$2,917,685

As of late September 2025, Faber Residence’s starting price of around $1,995 psf positions it at the lower end of the spectrum. Only Canberra Crescent Residences, at $1,985 psf on average, come in lower.

Most other OCR and RCR launches have crossed well above the $2,100 psf, with projects like Springleaf Residence ($2,176 psf) and Lyndenwoods ($2,462 psf) setting higher benchmarks even in non-central locations. 

This positions Faber Residence as one of the more affordable projects on the market today. Faber Residence does not have the branding of a landmark development, like Promenade Peak or River Green; but what it lacks in CBD proximity, it makes up for in family layouts and school access.

A quick disclaimer: 

We are comparing Faber Residence’s indicative starting $PSF against the average transacted $PSF of other launches. 

While not a one-to-one comparison, it still highlights that Faber Residence is being pitched below the prevailing market averages. 

Another point to note is the developer margins. Across the current slate of launches, average profit margins based on $PSF range from about 18 to 38 per cent, with an average of 27 per cent. 

Faber Residence’s land bid was not particularly aggressive compared to some peers, which could allow the developer more room for discounts while maintaining a healthy margin. But just because they can, doesn’t mean they will.

The next step is to break this down by bedroom type, to see how Faber Residence compares against the minimum pricing of other launches in each region.

Across all unit types, Faber Residence is consistently the most affordable (or second most affordable) project.

Across all unit types, Faber Residence is consistently the most affordable (or second most affordable) project.

Now let’s take a closer look at the existing new launches available in D5

Project	Tenure	District	Average $PSF for new sale transactions	Average developer’s profit margin (based on average $PSF)	Average quantum
Faber Residence			Starting from $1,995
Blossoms By The Park	99-year	5	$2,450	23.36%	$2,193,266
Lyndenwoods	99-year	5	$2,462	–	$2,262,991
Bloomsbury Residences	99-year	5	$2,503	20.57%	$1,927,345
The Hillshore	Freehold	5	$2,534	35.67%	$2,471,070
ELTA	99-year	5	$2,548	18.18%	$2,090,020
Terra Hill	Freehold	5	$2,669	28.38%	$2,686,632

Within D5 itself, Faber Residence is priced lower than its peers. At around $1,995 psf, it undercuts all others. The next step up is Blossoms by the Park at $2,450 psf, followed by Lyndenwoods and Bloomsbury Residences in the mid-$2,400 to $2,500 psf range. At the upper end, freehold projects like The Hillshore and Terra Hill are averaging between $2,534 and $2,669 psf.

Developer margins across these projects range from about 18 to 36 per cent, with an average around 25 per cent. This suggests that pricing for most of these launches has already been set at healthy levels, leaving less room for discounting. By contrast, Faber Residence’s lower entry cost could offer buyers a chance to secure a unit, without stretching into the same price band as competitors.

These projects also still have unsold units on the market. 

So to understand how Faber Residence lines up, the next step is to look at the most affordable units available in each development.

2-bedroom units

Project	Tenure	District	2-bedroom prices
Faber Residence			Starting from $1,290,000
Bloomsbury Residences	99-year	District 5	$1,638,000
The Hillshore	Freehold	District 5	$1,768,000
Terra Hill	Freehold	District 5	$1,913,000
ELTA	99-year	District 5	$2,241,000

3-bedroom units

Project	Tenure	District	3-bedroom prices
Faber Residence			Starting from $1,590,000
Bloomsbury Residences	99-year	District 5	$2,227,000
Terra Hill	Freehold	District 5	$2,406,000
The Hillshore	Freehold	District 5	$2,588,000
ELTA	99-year	District 5	$2,604,000
LyndenWoods	99-year	District 5	$3,043,000

4-bedroom units

Project	Tenure	District	4-bedroom prices
Faber Residence			Starting from $2,390,000
ELTA	99-year	District 5	$3,103,000
Bloomsbury Residences	99-year	District 5	$2,880,000
Blossoms By The Park	99-year	District 5	$3,436,000
Terra Hill	Freehold	District 5	$3,504,000
The Hillshore	Freehold	District 5	$3,880,000
LyndenWoods	99-year	District 5	$4,230,000

5-bedroom units

Project	Tenure	District	5-bedroom prices
Faber Residence			Starting from $3,190,000
ELTA	99-year	District 5	$3,894,000
Bloomsbury Residences	99-year	District 5	$4,470,000
Terra Hill	Freehold	District 5	$5,567,000

When comparing new launches within Clementi, Faber Residence and ELTA are the two most natural competitors. Both projects target family buyers and are positioned in similar catchments, though Faber Residence has the advantage of being within one kilometre of Nan Hua Primary School.

Across all unit types, Faber Residence is also priced more affordably. ELTA’s two-bedroom units start from $2.24 million, compared to $1.29 million at Faber Residence. 

Faber Residence starts from $3.19 million, while the equivalent at ELTA is closer to $3.89 million

For larger homes, the difference is more pronounced: a five-bedder at Faber Residence starts from $3.19 million, while the equivalent at ELTA is closer to $3.89 million.

A key point here is land cost. Faber Residence sits on a site with a lower breakeven $PSF than ELTA, which gives GuocoLand greater pricing flexibility. The developer could keep pricing deliberately below ELTA to attract stronger upgrader interest, or narrow the gap while leaning on the additional appeal of being within range of Nan Hua.

Speculatively we’d bank on the former, as so far the developer seems to lean heavily on price advantage.

With pricing context established, the next step is to compare layouts. 

We will compare those in Faber Residence to the most affordable unit available in ELTA (based on prices as of September 2025)

ELTA’s two-bedder is slightly larger and includes an additional study. Both are dumbbell designs, placing the bedrooms on opposite sides of the living area.

In both cases, the common bathroom is Jack and Jill style, effectively giving each unit two ensuite bedrooms. Kitchens are tucked into a corner, although ELTA’s has the flexibility to be enclosed more easily. The living and dining areas are nicely segregated in both projects, and each comes with a balcony extending off the living room.

While ELTA offers more space on paper, its asking price is commensurately higher. Faber Residence, by contrast, is arguably as efficient but also more affordable – for many buyers, this balance between efficiency and price will lean in Faber Residence’s favour.

The three-bedroom units in ELTA are larger than their counterparts in Faber Residence, though both share many similarities in terms of layout features.

Faber Residence adopts a dumbbell configuration, separating the bedrooms on either side of the living space, while ELTA uses a more conventional arrangement. In both projects, the common bathroom is Jack and Jill style, giving each unit two ensuite bedrooms.

The living and dining areas are clearly segregated in both layouts, and each includes a balcony extending from the living area. Both kitchens are enclosed, but ELTA’s has the advantage of windows for natural light and ventilation. Faber Residence’s enclosed kitchen, by contrast, does not have windows.

Another distinction is at the entrance: ELTA provides a small foyer for added privacy, whereas Faber Residence opens directly into the living and dining space.

Despite these differences, Faber Residence stands out for its efficiency. While ELTA’s units are larger, their asking prices are significantly higher. Faber Residence delivers a functional, family-friendly layout at a lower entry quantum, making it a very attractive alternative in today’s market.

The four-bedroom units at ELTA are larger than those at Faber Residence. Both are configured as four-bedroom, two-bath units, though Faber Residence includes an additional powder room. 

In both cases, the common bathroom is Jack and Jill style, giving each apartment two ensuite bedrooms.

The living and dining areas are separated in both layouts, with a balcony extending from the living room. Kitchens differ more noticeably: Faber Residence offers a sizeable enclosed kitchen, while ELTA provides a split wet-and-dry kitchen arrangement, complete with a yard, store, and WC for added functionality.

As pointed out above, Faber Residence also includes a home shelter, though it is placed along the walkway to the bedrooms – that’s generally considered less desirable.

All four bedrooms in both projects are large enough to fit double beds, and both layouts feature a small foyer at the entrance to enhance privacy.

Although ELTA’s version provides more space and additional utility areas, its asking price is also significantly higher. Couple that with a more efficient configuration and practical features like the powder room, and Faber Residence has an edge here.

The five-bedroom units at ELTA are larger than those at Faber Residence.

Faber Residence is configured as a five-bedroom, three-bath unit with a powder room, while ELTA offers a five-bedroom, four-bath layout with a powder room as well. Both adopt dumbbell layouts. In terms of bathrooms, Faber Residence provides three ensuite bedrooms, while ELTA goes further with all five bedrooms ensuite.

The living and dining areas are nicely segregated in both projects. Each has a balcony, but their design differs: Faber Residence’s balcony extends from the living room to an adjacent bedroom, whereas ELTA’s balcony spans only the width of the living room.

Faber Residence provides a sizable enclosed kitchen with a yard, while ELTA splits its space into wet and dry kitchens, and supplements this with a yard, utility area, and WC. Both projects include a home shelter, though placement varies: Faber Residence’s is near the main entrance, while ELTA’s is located along the bedroom walkway. 

All five bedrooms in both developments can comfortably fit double beds, with both units also featuring a small foyer at the entrance for added privacy.

While ELTA offers greater overall space and more ensuite bathrooms, its asking price is considerably higher. This could be a deciding point, which makes Faber Residence more attractive by comparison. 

Exit strategies for Faber Residence

A key part of any exit strategy is understanding who the future buyers are likely to be. 

Historically, Clementi has long been one of the stronger upgrader markets, with HDB resale flats in the area commanding above-average prices. This should create a good pool of upgrader households, able to make the jump to private properties nearby. 

Let’s check:

Year	HDB	Unknown	Private	% HDB Upgraders	% of existing private property owners
2020	700	275	794	40%	45%
2021	1123	478	1532	36%	49%
2022	452	58	643	39%	56%
2023	318	55	589	33%	61%
2024	339	16	675	33%	66%

The proportion of HDB upgraders has tapered from around 40 per cent in 2020 to roughly one-third in 2024. Still, they continue to form a significant share of the private property market here. 

Let’s look at the quantum range that these HDB upgraders are actually buying into.  This will help us understand which unit types at Faber Residence are realistically within their reach.

Price range	No. of transactions (done between 2024 to June 2025)
Under $1M	71
Between $1M – $1.5M	191
Between $1.6M – $2M	179
Between $2.1M – $2.5M	94
Between $2.6M – $3M	39
Above $3M	9

The largest proportion of transactions fell between $1 million and $1.5 million, closely followed by $1.6 million to $2 million. Based on current resale benchmarks and indicative new launch pricing, these ranges correspond mainly to two- and three-bedroom units.

This aligns well with Faber Residence. Its two-bedders (from $1.29 million) and three-bedders (from $1.59 million) fall within the most active upgrader price bands. As such, these unit types are likely to see better demand and smoother exits in future.

However, we should also look at the supply and demand situation

For some context, here’s what unit supply looks like across Singapore (based on estimated units as of 2025)

Bedrooms	CCR	RCR	OCR
1BR	18%	17%	9%
2BR	28%	30%	24%
3BR	36%	43%	52%
4BR	17%	9%	13%
5BR	1%	1%	2%

Across all regions, three-bedders dominate supply. Still, the OCR in particular stands out: more than half of all units here are three-bedders, compared to 36 to 43 per cent in the CCR and RCR. 

Unsurprisingly, the number of compact one and two-bedders is smaller in the OCR, as these are often bought as rental assets in more central areas. 

But what about the supply of units closer to Faber Residence, specifically?

No. of bedrooms	1BR	2BR	3BR	4BR	5BR
Percentage in D5	38%	47%	45%	67%	71%

In the area around Faber Residence, there’s a bigger supply of large family units: we can see four- and five-bedders making up a much bigger share than the D5 average.

This actually works in its favour. Faber Residence’s mix of mostly three-bedders thus fills a gap: it provides a more affordable option for nearby upgrader families, compared to the high quantum, outsized older units. 

Meanwhile, its two-bedders can cater to younger couples and smaller households, as supply of these is also thinner here.

It fits so well that it’s probably deliberate on the part of the developers, who are well aware of the supply situation. We can see it in the unit mix for Faber Residence:

Unit type	Estimated size (sq ft)	Number of units	Unit breakdown
2 Bedroom Standard	646	80	20.05%
3 Bedroom Basic	797 – 818	93
3 Bedroom Standard	861	56
3 Bedroom Plus	1,033 – 1,044	50	49.87%
4 Bedroom Basic	1,119	40
4 Bedroom Standard	1,206 – 1,270	60	25.06%
5 Bedroom Standard	1,485	20	5.01%

Faber Residence is thus dominated by three-bedders, with four-bedders following behind, and smaller allocations for twos and fives.

Now let’s take a look at the resale performance of various unit sizes in the district

Year	1-bedroom average $PSF	2-bedroom average $PSF	3-bedroom average $PSF	4-bedroom average $PSF	5-bedroom average $PSF
2014	$1,526	$1,142	$1,089	$1,050	$1,208
2015	$1,520	$1,101	$1,069	$1,056	$1,097
2016	$1,496	$1,077	$1,044	$1,009	$1,156
2017	$1,412	$1,108	$1,068	$1,062	$1,137
2018	$1,528	$1,219	$1,173	$1,178	$1,187
2019	$1,488	$1,199	$1,165	$1,252	$1,191
2020	$1,422	$1,222	$1,169	$1,208	$1,334
2021	$1,529	$1,336	$1,311	$1,322	$1,349
2022	$1,601	$1,483	$1,433	$1,349	$1,253
2023	$1,743	$1,644	$1,608	$1,547	$1,659
2024	$1,770	$1,809	$1,751	$1,778	$1,735
Annualised	1.50%	4.70%	4.87%	5.40%	3.69%

It appears that family-oriented units (three- and four-bedders) have been the most resilient and rewarding segments in D5. Smaller one-bedroom units appear less compelling in the OCR market.

To sharpen the picture, we’ll now look at actual profitability by unit type. 

This focuses only on units bought from 2014 onwards, and sold between 2024 and June 2025.

2-bedroom units

Gains

Project	Average purchase price	Average sale price	Average gains	Average ROI	Average holding period (years)	No. of transactions
WATERFRONT @ FABER	$914,917	$1,104,432	$189,515	21.18%	9.5	9
TWIN VEW	$1,069,188	$1,310,688	$241,500	22.73%	6.1	16
CLAVON	$1,219,213	$1,498,800	$279,586	22.99%	3.9	61
REGENT PARK	$942,500	$1,167,500	$225,000	23.75%	5.2	2
PARC CLEMATIS	$1,154,186	$1,432,851	$278,665	24.18%	4.3	78
PARC RIVIERA	$837,125	$1,049,920	$212,795	25.67%	6.8	44
WHISTLER GRAND	$1,010,813	$1,274,626	$263,813	26.30%	4.9	41
THE CLEMENT CANOPY	$1,007,333	$1,297,810	$290,476	29.38%	6.9	21
HUNDRED TREES	$1,154,629	$1,501,667	$347,037	29.71%	4.9	3
THE TRILINQ	$1,191,000	$1,557,815	$366,815	29.98%	7.8	12
BOTANNIA	$1,140,000	$1,520,000	$380,000	33.33%	3.8	1
CARABELLE	$1,278,250	$1,709,039	$430,789	33.77%	5.0	4
THE PARC CONDOMINIUM	$1,335,000	$1,830,000	$495,000	37.59%	7.0	2
THE INFINITI	$1,130,000	$1,600,000	$470,000	41.59%	4.2	1
Average/total	$1,098,868	$1,418,225	$319,357	28.73%	5.7	295

Losses

Project	Average purchase price	Average sale price	Average gains	Average ROI	Average holding period (years)	No. of transactions
PARC CLEMATIS	$1,430,000	$1,405,000	-$25,000	-1.75%	3.3	1

Across 295 transactions, the average purchase price was about $1.1 million, with resale prices averaging $1.42 million. This translates to an average gain of roughly $319,000, or an ROI of 28.7 per cent over an average holding period of 5.7 years.

The ROI spread across projects ranged from around 21 per cent to over 40 per cent, with developments like The Infiniti, The Parc Condominium, and Carabelle seeing some of the strongest returns.

Losses have been rare. Over the past 18 months, there was just one unprofitable two-bedder transaction (the aforementioned outlier at Parc Clematis.)

Against this backdrop, Faber Residence’s starting price of $1.29 million places it on the lower end of the observed resale range. 

3-bedroom units

Gains

Project	Average purchase price	Average sale price	Average gains	Average ROI	Average holding period (years)	No. of transactions
WATERFRONT @ FABER	$1,347,246	$1,647,286	$300,040	23.12%	7.9	7
CLAVON	$1,609,370	$2,125,582	$516,211	32.07%	3.7	27
TWIN VEW	$1,465,059	$1,960,318	$495,260	34.29%	5.7	17
PARC CLEMATIS	$1,548,018	$2,079,790	$531,772	34.32%	4.0	56
THE INFINITI	$1,420,000	$1,930,000	$510,000	35.92%	6.3	1
PARC RIVIERA	$1,168,641	$1,586,651	$418,010	36.13%	6.4	13
THE TRILINQ	$1,449,500	$1,982,324	$532,824	36.85%	7.5	24
THE CLEMENT CANOPY	$1,465,400	$2,020,744	$555,344	38.35%	6.9	20
WHISTLER GRAND	$1,394,117	$2,007,333	$613,216	44.13%	5.4	15
FABER CREST	$1,082,944	$1,579,444	$496,500	46.01%	5.4	2
BOTANNIA	$1,513,750	$2,230,000	$716,250	47.42%	9.2	4
THE PARC CONDOMINIUM	$1,640,580	$2,411,689	$771,109	48.43%	6.7	10
CARABELLE	$1,482,667	$2,196,667	$714,000	48.60%	9.1	3
REGENT PARK	$1,079,333	$1,640,000	$560,667	53.64%	7.8	3
MONTEREY PARK CONDOMINIUM	$1,485,000	$2,499,000	$1,014,000	68.31%	6.5	2
Average/total	$1,410,108	$1,993,122	$583,014	41.84%	6.6	204

Across 204 transactions, the average purchase price was about $1.41 million, while resale prices averaged nearly $1.99 million. This translates to an average gain of $583,000, or an ROI of 41.8 per cent, over an average holding period of 6.6 years.

There were no unprofitable three-bedder transactions recorded during this period. ROIs ranged from around 22 per cent for projects like Waterfront @ Faber, to as high as 68 per cent for Monterey Park Condominium. Even in more recent launches such as Clavon and Parc Clematis, returns have already been strong, averaging over 30 per cent.

Faber Residence’s starting price of $1.59 million places it on the lower end of the resale transaction range. Because this segment delivered the most rewarding outcome, the three-bedders may be the ones to watch for at Faber Residence.

4-bedroom units

Gains

Project	Average purchase price	Average sale price	Average gains	Average ROI	Average holding period (years)	No. of transactions
NEWEST	$2,300,000	$2,680,000	$380,000	16.52%	3.5	1
WATERFRONT @ FABER	$1,548,333	$1,846,667	$298,333	19.70%	9.6	3
CLAVON	$2,219,143	$2,926,643	$707,500	32.07%	3.4	14
PARC CLEMATIS	$2,337,126	$3,078,985	$741,859	32.15%	3.4	15
TWIN VEW	$1,956,714	$2,611,143	$654,429	33.60%	5.1	7
WHISTLER GRAND	$1,726,748	$2,363,800	$637,052	37.15%	4.9	10
CARABELLE	$1,880,000	$2,580,000	$700,000	37.23%	4.2	1
PARC RIVIERA	$1,435,333	$2,014,278	$578,944	41.30%	6.1	14
BOTANNIA	$1,877,500	$2,722,000	$844,500	45.20%	4.6	4
THE TRILINQ	$1,719,667	$2,512,963	$793,296	46.48%	7.9	3
THE PARC CONDOMINIUM	$1,974,444	$2,898,444	$924,000	46.74%	8.9	2
THE INFINITI	$1,645,000	$2,415,000	$770,000	46.92%	6.6	2
THE CLEMENT CANOPY	$1,668,500	$2,543,750	$875,250	52.57%	7.4	4
Average/total	$1,868,347	$2,553,359	$685,013	37.51%	5.8	80

Losses

Project	Average purchase price	Average sale price	Average gains	Average ROI	Average holding period (years)	No. of transactions
THE TRILINQ	$4,975,560	$4,300,000	-$675,560	-13.58%	4.9	1

Across 80 profitable transactions, the average purchase price was about $1.87 million, with resale prices averaging $2.55 million. This works out to gains of roughly $685,000, or a 37.5 per cent ROI, over an average holding period of 5.8 years.

Returns varied across projects, from around 17 per cent at NEWest to over 52 per cent at The Clement Canopy. Strong performances were also seen at The Parc Condominium and Botannia, both averaging gains above $800,000.

There was just one unprofitable outlier during this period: a unit at The Trilinq, which recorded a loss of 13.6 per cent.

Against this backdrop, Faber Residence’s starting price of $2.39 million places it on the lower end of current resale benchmarks. With average ROI for four-bedders ranging between 17 and 53 per cent, its pricing gives it a competitive edge.

However, we’d keep in mind that most HDB upgraders (see above) struggle with a quantum above $2 million; so that still limits the pool of prospective future buyers. 

5-bedroom units

Gains

Project	Average purchase price	Average sale price	Average gains	Average ROI	Average holding period (years)	No. of transactions
PARC CLEMATIS	$2,647,500	$3,385,000	$737,500	27.81%	3.1	2

Over the last 18 months, there were only two five-bedroom transactions at Parc Clematis. Each was profitable, with an average purchase price of about $2.65 million and an average resale of $3.39 million. That translates to gains of roughly $737,500, or a 27.8 per cent ROI, over an average holding period of just 3.1 years.

Faber Residence’s starting price of $3.19 million is lower. But when it comes to units of this size and quantum, the buyer demographic is much more niche; performance of these high-quantum units are inherently less predictable. 

We can draw a few key takeaways from the resale data:

• Three-bedder units have delivered the strongest average ROI in recent years, making them a particularly appealing segment for both buyers and resellers.
  
• Most profitable transactions saw relatively long holding periods, indicating that value tends to accrue over time rather than in quick flips.
  
• Faber Residence’s starting prices are lower than many comparable resale projects nearby, which gives it a compelling entry point.
  
• Even though unit sizes at Faber Residence are leaner, the layouts make good use of space, helping it punch above its size class.

Now let’s see if potential future developments nearby could have an effect

There are three land plots in the Clementi/West Coast area earmarked for future residential development. These include the current site of the Clementi Police Divisional Headquarters, a cricket field, and an empty land plot. 

Once redeveloped, these sites will inject fresh supply into the market, potentially introducing competition for Faber Residence. It’s too early, however, and information too limited, to make a good guess at the impact.

This will boil down to issues like whether the new plots are HDB flats or condos (we don’t know yet.) If they’re condos, issues like price, unit mix, whether they’re targeted at the same family demographic as Faber Residence, etc. will all play a role. 

For now, they’re a known-unknown. Buyers can’t tell what residential projects will crop up here, but at least they know those residential plots are there and waiting. 

Conclusion

If there’s one word that could describe Faber Residence’s advantage, its price.

If there’s one word that could describe Faber Residence’s advantage, its price. Thanks to its compact layouts, Faber Residence’s units’ starting prices are in the low- to mid-range, compared to nearby projects. While units are smaller, efficient features such as jack-and-jill bathrooms and dumbbell layouts mitigate some of the effects.

On the resale market, Parc Clematis is the closest benchmark, given its pricing and similar proximity to Nan Hua. But whilst it is a resale competitor, Parc Clematis has also established that the area “works” for gains: it has seen 266 profitable transactions to just one small loss. And Faber Residence is priced competitively here: its two-bedroom starting price is in line with Parc Clematis, while its larger units come in lower.

Against the wider new-launch market, Faber Residence stands out as one of the most affordable, with the second-lowest indicative psf and consistently low entry prices across unit types. Within District 5, it is the cheapest new option available. Buyers are also likely to compare it to ELTA; but with ELTA’s higher psf and quantum, Faber Residence would be more interesting for buyers with budget concerns at this point. Its lower breakeven psf also gives the developer greater pricing flexibility, whether to hold the line as the most affordable option or narrow the gap with ELTA while emphasising its Nan Hua Primary advantage.

Then there’s the buyer trends in D5: they show existing private owners making up the majority, though HDB upgraders remain a sizeable one-third of demand. Most buy in the $1 million to $1.5 million range, which aligns with Faber Residence’s two- and smaller three-bedroom units.

Overall, Faber Residence is competitively priced for a family project in D5 (although we have to caveat that we don’t know how prices would be staged up), and it’s coming at the right time, when upgraders are increasingly worried about the viability of upgrading. 

For more price comparisons and deep dives into the Singapore property market, follow us on Stacked Pro.