Overall score
Bacchus Marsh
49.4/100
Coimadai
31.7/100
Bacchus Marsh for retirees and families.
See which suburb leads on livability, safety, schools, and lifestyle.
Head to head
Overall score
Bacchus Marsh
49.4/100
Coimadai
31.7/100
Crime rate
Bacchus Marsh
145.9 / 1k
Coimadai
99.8 / 1k
Nearby amenities
Bacchus Marsh
278
Coimadai
1
Population
Bacchus Marsh
7,808
Coimadai
409
Desirability pillars scored 0–100 vs comparable suburbs
Clearer edge on lifestyle fit (score gap ≥ 3)
Who each suburb suits — composite scores out of 100
Side-by-side scores for every compared metric.
Exact figures for every metric — winner highlighted in bold.
| Category | Bacchus Marsh | Coimadai |
|---|---|---|
| Overall score | 49.4/100 | 31.7/100 |
| Housing (desirability) | 53.0/100 | 42.7/100 |
| Crime rate | 145.9 / 1k | 99.8 / 1k |
| Schools & preschools | 3 | 1 |
| Weather (desirability) | 82.3/100 | 82.3/100 |
| Parks & reserves | 8 | 1 |
| Public transport stops | 32 | — |
| Walkability | 100.0/100 | 0.0/100 |
| Nearby amenities | 278 | 1 |
| Planning activity | 73 | 14 |
| Green cover | 8.2% | 0.0% |
| Population | 7,808 | 409 |
| SEIFA (IRSAD decile) | 4/10 | 8/10 |
Put side by side, Bacchus Marsh is a well-serviced metro mid-sized suburb with plenty happening nearby, and Coimadai is a more rural smaller community that rewards people who want room to breathe. Bacchus Marsh sits in a middle-ring position, whereas Coimadai is more regionally self-contained.
On the data, Bacchus Marsh is stronger for housing affordability, a quieter safety profile, and schools and education options; Coimadai answers with a calmer planning outlook and stronger socioeconomic advantage. On housing, Bacchus Marsh sits in a well priced band, compared with a gently premium feel in Coimadai.
On balance, families, investors, value-focused buyers, and households prioritising schools are more likely to prefer Bacchus Marsh, while Coimadai 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.