Bacchus Marsh vs Long Forest, VIC Suburb Comparison

Bacchus Marsh for retirees and families; Long Forest for value and schools.

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

Head to head

Visual comparison

Bacchus MarshLong Forest

Overall score

Bacchus Marsh

49.4/100

Long Forest

44.0/100

Crime rate

Bacchus Marsh

145.9 / 1k

Long Forest

34.3 / 1k

Nearby amenities

Bacchus Marsh

278

Long Forest

3

Population

Bacchus Marsh

7,808

Long Forest

343

Metric leadBacchus Marsh 6Long Forest 31 tiedacross 10 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.

CategoryBacchus MarshLong Forest
Overall score49.4/10044.0/100
Housing (desirability)53.0/10052.2/100
Crime rate145.9 / 1k34.3 / 1k
Schools & preschools3—
Weather (desirability)82.3/10082.3/100
Parks & reserves8—
Public transport stops32—
Walkability100.0/1000.0/100
Nearby amenities2783
Planning activity734
Green cover8.2%0.0%
Population7,808343
SEIFA (IRSAD decile)4/107/10

Comparison summary

Bacchus Marsh is a well-serviced metro mid-sized suburb with plenty happening nearby, while Long Forest is a slower-paced smaller community with open surrounds. Bacchus Marsh sits in a middle-ring position, whereas Long Forest is within day-trip reach of the capital.

Bacchus Marsh tends to lead on walkability, nearby cafés and amenities, and overall desirability, while Long Forest stands out for housing affordability, a quieter safety profile, and a calmer planning outlook. Bacchus Marsh generally means more mid-market housing value, while Long Forest leans toward housing toward the upper end of the market.

Bacchus Marsh suits investors and households prioritising schools more clearly, whereas Long Forest is the stronger match for retirees, families, 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