Overall score
Baskerville
39.6/100
Upper Swan
48.7/100
Baskerville vs Upper Swan, WA Suburb Comparison
Upper Swan for retirees and families.
See which suburb leads on livability, safety, schools, and lifestyle.
Head to head
Visual comparison
BaskervilleUpper Swan
Crime rate
Baskerville
43.1 / 1k
Upper Swan
43.1 / 1k
Nearby amenities
Baskerville
21
Upper Swan
17
Population
Baskerville
302
Upper Swan
549
Metric leadBaskerville 2Upper Swan 62 tiedacross 10 compared metrics
Livability profile
Desirability pillars scored 0–100 vs comparable suburbs
Quick verdicts
Clearer edge on lifestyle fit (score gap ≥ 3)
- Best for retireesUpper Swan
- Best for familiesUpper Swan
- Best for investmentUpper Swan
- Best for best valueUpper Swan
- Best for best schoolsUpper Swan
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 | Baskerville | Upper Swan |
|---|---|---|
| Overall score | 39.6/100 | 48.7/100 |
| Housing (desirability) | 47.4/100 | 53.7/100 |
| Crime rate | 43.1 / 1k | 43.1 / 1k |
| Schools & preschools | — | 1 |
| Weather (desirability) | 23.4/100 | 23.4/100 |
| Public transport stops | 10 | 22 |
| Walkability | 15.0/100 | 34.0/100 |
| Nearby amenities | 21 | 17 |
| Green cover | 1.1% | 13.9% |
| Population | 302 | 549 |
| SEIFA (IRSAD decile) | 9/10 | 5/10 |
Comparison summary
Put side by side, Baskerville is a sought-after metro smaller community where housing reflects strong local demand, and Upper Swan is a sought-after metro smaller community where housing reflects strong local demand.
Baskerville tends to lead on nearby cafés and amenities, plus stronger socioeconomic advantage, while Upper Swan stands out for housing affordability, public transport access, and walkability.
Retirees and families may find Baskerville the better fit, while investors, value-focused buyers, and households prioritising schools are more likely to prefer Upper Swan.
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.