Awaba vs Cooranbong, NSW Suburb Comparison

Awaba for families and investment; Cooranbong for retirees and value.

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

Head to head

Visual comparison

AwabaCooranbong

Overall score

Awaba

35.2/100

Cooranbong

48.8/100

Crime rate

Awaba

80.2 / 1k

Cooranbong

36.7 / 1k

Nearby amenities

Awaba

22

Cooranbong

21

Population

Awaba

430

Cooranbong

7,077

Metric leadAwaba 3Cooranbong 82 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.

CategoryAwabaCooranbong
Overall score35.2/10048.8/100
Housing (desirability)10.1/10056.8/100
Crime rate80.2 / 1k36.7 / 1k
Schools & preschools11
Weather (desirability)60.5/10060.5/100
Parks & reserves12
Public transport stops1371
Walkability19.5/10030.0/100
Nearby amenities2221
Planning activity355
Green cover18.6%10.1%
Population4307,077
SEIFA (IRSAD decile)3/106/10

Comparison summary

Awaba is a metro smaller community with a gently premium housing feel and familiar suburban calm, while Cooranbong is a regional mid-sized suburb that feels self-contained without feeling remote. Awaba sits further out with more breathing room, whereas Cooranbong is more regionally self-contained.

Awaba pulls ahead on nearby cafés and amenities, plus a calmer planning outlook, whereas Cooranbong is the better pick for housing affordability, a quieter safety profile, and parks and reserves. On housing, Awaba sits in a expensive band, compared with a gently premium feel in Cooranbong.

On balance, retirees, families, investors, value-focused buyers, and households prioritising schools are more likely to prefer Cooranbong, while Awaba 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