Overall score
Bellbird
36.7/100
Cessnock
37.6/100
Bellbird vs Cessnock, NSW Suburb Comparison
Bellbird for investment and value; Cessnock for retirees.
See which suburb leads on livability, safety, schools, and lifestyle.
Head to head
Visual comparison
BellbirdCessnock
Crime rate
Bellbird
97.0 / 1k
Cessnock
96.9 / 1k
Nearby amenities
Bellbird
39
Cessnock
165
Population
Bellbird
2,338
Cessnock
16,300
Metric leadBellbird 2Cessnock 83 tiedacross 13 compared metrics
Livability profile
Desirability pillars scored 0–100 vs comparable suburbs
Quick verdicts
Clearer edge on lifestyle fit (score gap ≥ 3)
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 | Bellbird | Cessnock |
|---|---|---|
| Overall score | 36.7/100 | 37.6/100 |
| Housing (desirability) | 60.5/100 | 35.3/100 |
| Crime rate | 97.0 / 1k | 96.9 / 1k |
| Schools & preschools | 1 | 5 |
| Weather (desirability) | 56.4/100 | 56.4/100 |
| Parks & reserves | 1 | 19 |
| Public transport stops | 63 | 280 |
| Walkability | 32.0/100 | 83.0/100 |
| Nearby amenities | 39 | 165 |
| Planning activity | 36 | 73 |
| Green cover | 10.6% | 10.6% |
| Population | 2,338 | 16,300 |
| SEIFA (IRSAD decile) | 1/10 | 1/10 |
Comparison summary
Bellbird reads as a regional smaller community that feels self-contained without feeling remote; Cessnock is a lively metro established suburb with dining and everyday convenience close by. Bellbird sits more regionally self-contained, whereas Cessnock is in a middle-ring position.
Bellbird tends to lead on housing affordability and a calmer planning outlook, while Cessnock stands out for a quieter safety profile, schools and education options, and parks and reserves.
Investors and value-focused buyers may find Bellbird the better fit, while retirees, families, and households prioritising schools are more likely to prefer Cessnock.
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.