Overall score
Burdell
35.0/100
Mount Low
33.4/100
Burdell for retirees; Mount Low for value and schools.
See which suburb leads on livability, safety, schools, and lifestyle.
Head to head
Overall score
Burdell
35.0/100
Mount Low
33.4/100
Crime rate
Burdell
65.7 / 1k
Mount Low
65.6 / 1k
Nearby amenities
Burdell
14
Mount Low
23
Population
Burdell
7,171
Mount Low
5,488
Desirability pillars scored 0–100 vs comparable suburbs
Clearer edge on lifestyle fit (score gap ≥ 3)
Who each suburb suits — composite scores out of 100
Side-by-side scores for every compared metric.
Exact figures for every metric — winner highlighted in bold.
| Category | Burdell | Mount Low |
|---|---|---|
| Overall score | 35.0/100 | 33.4/100 |
| Housing (desirability) | 50.4/100 | 51.5/100 |
| Crime rate | 65.7 / 1k | 65.6 / 1k |
| Schools & preschools | 1 | 1 |
| Weather (desirability) | 19.8/100 | 19.8/100 |
| Parks & reserves | 2 | 1 |
| Walkability | 0.0/100 | 0.0/100 |
| Nearby amenities | 14 | 23 |
| Green cover | 2.5% | 0.6% |
| Population | 7,171 | 5,488 |
| SEIFA (IRSAD decile) | 7/10 | 6/10 |
Burdell reads as a quieter mid-sized suburb with space and a country-town pace; Mount Low is a hillside mid-sized suburb with greener streets and a quieter pace. Mount Low sits among greener hillside streets, while Burdell keeps a flatter suburban layout.
Burdell tends to lead on parks and reserves, overall desirability, and a larger local community, while Mount Low stands out for housing affordability, a quieter safety profile, and nearby cafés and amenities.
On balance, investors and value-focused buyers are more likely to prefer Mount Low, while Burdell 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.