Beerburrum vs Glass House Mountains, QLD Suburb Comparison

Beerburrum for investment; Glass House Mountains for retirees and families.

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

Head to head

Visual comparison

BeerburrumGlass House Mountains

Overall score

Beerburrum

33.6/100

Glass House Mountains

46.5/100

Crime rate

Beerburrum

73.3 / 1k

Glass House Mountains

29.4 / 1k

Nearby amenities

Beerburrum

19

Glass House Mountains

34

Population

Beerburrum

941

Glass House Mountains

5,601

Metric leadBeerburrum 2Glass House Mountains 64 tiedacross 12 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.

CategoryBeerburrumGlass House Mountains
Overall score33.6/10046.5/100
Housing (desirability)62.0/10053.9/100
Crime rate73.3 / 1k29.4 / 1k
Schools & preschools11
Weather (desirability)31.2/10031.2/100
Parks & reserves522
Public transport stops44
Walkability8.0/1006.0/100
Nearby amenities1934
Planning activity1—
Green cover1.0%2.8%
Population9415,601
SEIFA (IRSAD decile)5/105/10

Comparison summary

Beerburrum reads as a hills smaller community where tree cover and calm define the mood; Glass House Mountains is a hills mid-sized suburb where tree cover and calm define the mood.

On the data, Beerburrum is stronger for walkability; Glass House Mountains answers with housing affordability, a quieter safety profile, and parks and reserves. On housing, Beerburrum sits in a well priced band, compared with a expensive feel in Glass House Mountains.

On balance, retirees, families, investors, value-focused buyers, and households prioritising schools are more likely to prefer Glass House Mountains, while Beerburrum 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