Adelaide Park vs Pacific Heights, QLD Suburb Comparison

Pacific Heights for families and investment.

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

Head to head

Visual comparison

Adelaide ParkPacific Heights

Overall score

Adelaide Park

40.6/100

Pacific Heights

42.3/100

Crime rate

Adelaide Park

62.5 / 1k

Pacific Heights

63.7 / 1k

Nearby amenities

Adelaide Park

0

Pacific Heights

2

Population

Adelaide Park

449

Pacific Heights

1,111

Metric leadAdelaide Park 1Pacific Heights 62 tiedacross 9 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.

CategoryAdelaide ParkPacific Heights
Overall score40.6/10042.3/100
Housing (desirability)44.3/10052.2/100
Crime rate62.5 / 1k63.7 / 1k
Schools & preschools—1
Weather (desirability)18.0/10018.0/100
Walkability0.0/1000.0/100
Nearby amenities02
Green cover34.5%41.6%
Population4491,111
SEIFA (IRSAD decile)6/108/10

Comparison summary

Put side by side, Adelaide Park is a slower-paced smaller community with open surrounds, and Pacific Heights is a hills smaller community where tree cover and calm define the mood. Pacific Heights sits among greener hillside streets, while Adelaide Park keeps a flatter suburban layout.

On the data, Adelaide Park is stronger for a country-town feel and an emerging neighbourhood; Pacific Heights answers with housing affordability, a quieter safety profile, and nearby cafés and amenities. On housing, Adelaide Park sits in a well priced band, compared with a gently premium feel in Pacific Heights.

On balance, families and households prioritising schools are more likely to prefer Pacific Heights, while Adelaide Park remains a solid alternative depending on what matters most day to day.

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