Acacia Gardens vs Kings Langley, NSW Suburb Comparison

Acacia Gardens for families and schools; Kings Langley for investment and value.

See which suburb leads on livability, safety, schools, and lifestyle.

Head to head

Visual comparison

Acacia GardensKings Langley

Overall score

Acacia Gardens

45.6/100

Kings Langley

51.9/100

Crime rate

Acacia Gardens

25.5 / 1k

Kings Langley

67.8 / 1k

Nearby amenities

Acacia Gardens

27

Kings Langley

100

Population

Acacia Gardens

3,668

Kings Langley

9,354

Metric leadAcacia Gardens 2Kings Langley 92 tiedacross 13 compared metrics

Livability profile

Desirability pillars scored 0–100 vs comparable suburbs

Audience fit

Who each suburb suits — composite scores out of 100

All metrics

Side-by-side scores for every compared metric.

Full comparison table

Exact figures for every metric — winner highlighted in bold.

CategoryAcacia GardensKings Langley
Overall score45.6/10051.9/100
Housing (desirability)11.7/10049.7/100
Crime rate25.5 / 1k67.8 / 1k
Schools & preschools89
Weather (desirability)82.3/10082.3/100
Parks & reserves113
Public transport stops39111
Walkability30.0/10055.0/100
Nearby amenities27100
Planning activity625
Green cover7.5%9.7%
Population3,6689,354
SEIFA (IRSAD decile)10/1010/10

Comparison summary

Acacia Gardens is a sought-after metro mid-sized suburb where housing reflects strong local demand, while Kings Langley is an energetic metro established suburb where cafés and local life overlap. Acacia Gardens sits further out with more breathing room, whereas Kings Langley is in a middle-ring position.

Acacia Gardens pulls ahead on a quieter safety profile and a calmer planning outlook, whereas Kings Langley is the better pick for housing affordability, schools and education options, and parks and reserves.

Acacia Gardens suits retirees, families, and households prioritising schools more clearly, whereas Kings Langley is the stronger match for investors and value-focused buyers.

Generated from the official metrics on this page. It can omit nuance or contain errors — check the tables and source notes before relying on it.

Related comparisons