Overall score
Aspley
64.8/100
Fitzgibbon
54.9/100
Aspley vs Fitzgibbon, QLD Suburb Comparison
Aspley for investment and value; Fitzgibbon for retirees and families.
See which suburb leads on livability, safety, schools, and lifestyle.
Head to head
Visual comparison
AspleyFitzgibbon
Crime rate
Aspley
59.3 / 1k
Fitzgibbon
38.1 / 1k
Nearby amenities
Aspley
296
Fitzgibbon
145
Population
Aspley
12,871
Fitzgibbon
6,296
Metric leadAspley 8Fitzgibbon 31 tiedacross 12 compared metrics
Livability profile
Desirability pillars scored 0–100 vs comparable suburbs
Quick verdicts
Clearer edge on lifestyle fit (score gap ≥ 3)
- Best for retireesFitzgibbon
- Best for familiesFitzgibbon
- Best for investmentAspley
- Best for best valueAspley
- Best for best schoolsAspley
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.
| Category | Aspley | Fitzgibbon |
|---|---|---|
| Overall score | 64.8/100 | 54.9/100 |
| Housing (desirability) | 72.1/100 | 74.0/100 |
| Crime rate | 59.3 / 1k | 38.1 / 1k |
| Schools & preschools | 9 | 6 |
| Weather (desirability) | 31.2/100 | 31.2/100 |
| Parks & reserves | 10 | 8 |
| Public transport stops | 62 | 17 |
| Walkability | 100.0/100 | 33.5/100 |
| Nearby amenities | 296 | 145 |
| Green cover | 13.1% | 24.1% |
| Population | 12,871 | 6,296 |
| SEIFA (IRSAD decile) | 9/10 | 6/10 |
Comparison summary
Aspley reads as a well-serviced metro established suburb with plenty happening nearby; Fitzgibbon is an energetic metro mid-sized suburb where cafés and local life overlap.
Aspley pulls ahead on schools and education options, parks and reserves, and public transport access, whereas Fitzgibbon is the better pick for a quieter safety profile.
On balance, families, value-focused buyers, and households prioritising schools are more likely to prefer Aspley, while Fitzgibbon 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.