Overall score
Beverley Park
45.6/100
Hurstville
50.0/100
Beverley Park vs Hurstville, NSW Suburb Comparison
Beverley Park for families; Hurstville for retirees.
See which suburb leads on livability, safety, schools, and lifestyle.
Head to head
Visual comparison
Beverley ParkHurstville
Crime rate
Beverley Park
59.8 / 1k
Hurstville
119.3 / 1k
Nearby amenities
Beverley Park
51
Hurstville
705
Population
Beverley Park
2,646
Hurstville
31,162
Metric leadBeverley Park 3Hurstville 91 tiedacross 13 compared metrics
Livability profile
Desirability pillars scored 0–100 vs comparable suburbs
Quick verdicts
Clearer edge on lifestyle fit (score gap ≥ 3)
- Best for retireesHurstville
- Best for familiesBeverley Park
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 | Beverley Park | Hurstville |
|---|---|---|
| Overall score | 45.6/100 | 50.0/100 |
| Housing (desirability) | 25.2/100 | 32.9/100 |
| Crime rate | 59.8 / 1k | 119.3 / 1k |
| Schools & preschools | 15 | 20 |
| Weather (desirability) | 82.3/100 | 82.3/100 |
| Parks & reserves | 4 | 18 |
| Public transport stops | 23 | 227 |
| Walkability | 30.0/100 | 100.0/100 |
| Nearby amenities | 51 | 705 |
| Planning activity | 11 | 26 |
| Green cover | 2.1% | 2.8% |
| Population | 2,646 | 31,162 |
| SEIFA (IRSAD decile) | 10/10 | 7/10 |
Comparison summary
Put side by side, Beverley Park is an energetic metro mid-sized suburb where cafés and local life overlap, and Hurstville is an energetic metro larger suburb where cafés and local life overlap.
Beverley Park pulls ahead on a quieter safety profile, a calmer planning outlook, and stronger socioeconomic advantage, whereas Hurstville is the better pick for housing affordability, schools and education options, and parks and reserves.
Retirees, families, and investors may find Beverley Park the better fit, while value-focused buyers are more likely to prefer Hurstville.
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.