Cape Burney vs Mount Tarcoola, WA Suburb Comparison

Cape Burney for families and investment; Mount Tarcoola for retirees and schools.

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

Head to head

Visual comparison

Cape BurneyMount Tarcoola

Overall score

Cape Burney

37.6/100

Mount Tarcoola

36.5/100

Crime rate

Cape Burney

132.8 / 1k

Mount Tarcoola

132.8 / 1k

Nearby amenities

Cape Burney

13

Mount Tarcoola

39

Population

Cape Burney

538

Mount Tarcoola

3,257

Metric leadCape Burney 2Mount Tarcoola 72 tiedacross 11 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.

CategoryCape BurneyMount Tarcoola
Overall score37.6/10036.5/100
Housing (desirability)82.4/10051.7/100
Crime rate132.8 / 1k132.8 / 1k
Schools & preschools—3
Weather (desirability)2.8/1002.8/100
Parks & reserves27
Public transport stops219
Walkability5.0/10028.5/100
Nearby amenities1339
Green cover0.0%7.1%
Population5383,257
SEIFA (IRSAD decile)3/105/10

Comparison summary

Cape Burney reads as a quieter smaller community with space and a country-town pace; Mount Tarcoola is a hillside mid-sized suburb with greener streets and a quieter pace. Mount Tarcoola sits among greener hillside streets, while Cape Burney keeps a flatter suburban layout.

Cape Burney tends to lead on housing affordability, while Mount Tarcoola stands out for parks and reserves, public transport access, and walkability. Cape Burney generally means more sought-after housing, while Mount Tarcoola leans toward housing toward the upper end of the market.

Cape Burney suits investors and value-focused buyers more clearly, whereas Mount Tarcoola is the stronger match for retirees, families, and households prioritising schools.

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