Overall score
Clagiraba
52.5/100
Mount Nathan
50.6/100
Clagiraba vs Mount Nathan, QLD Suburb Comparison
Clagiraba for schools; Mount Nathan for families.
See which suburb leads on livability, safety, schools, and lifestyle.
Head to head
Visual comparison
ClagirabaMount Nathan
Crime rate
Clagiraba
56.8 / 1k
Mount Nathan
57.0 / 1k
Nearby amenities
Clagiraba
10
Mount Nathan
4
Population
Clagiraba
651
Mount Nathan
1,375
Metric leadClagiraba 5Mount Nathan 32 tiedacross 10 compared metrics
Livability profile
Desirability pillars scored 0–100 vs comparable suburbs
Quick verdicts
Clearer edge on lifestyle fit (score gap ≥ 3)
- Best for familiesMount Nathan
- Best for best schoolsClagiraba
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 | Clagiraba | Mount Nathan |
|---|---|---|
| Overall score | 52.5/100 | 50.6/100 |
| Housing (desirability) | 48.0/100 | 43.2/100 |
| Crime rate | 56.8 / 1k | 57.0 / 1k |
| Schools & preschools | — | 1 |
| Weather (desirability) | 42.8/100 | 42.8/100 |
| Parks & reserves | 5 | 11 |
| Walkability | 0.0/100 | 2.0/100 |
| Nearby amenities | 10 | 4 |
| Green cover | 69.3% | 51.7% |
| Population | 651 | 1,375 |
| SEIFA (IRSAD decile) | 9/10 | 9/10 |
Comparison summary
Clagiraba is a metro smaller community with a gently premium housing feel and familiar suburban calm, while Mount Nathan is a leafier hillside smaller community with elevated outlooks. Mount Nathan sits among greener hillside streets, while Clagiraba keeps a flatter suburban layout.
Clagiraba tends to lead on a quieter safety profile, plus nearby cafés and amenities, while Mount Nathan stands out for parks and reserves, walkability, and overall desirability.
On balance, families, value-focused buyers, and households prioritising schools are more likely to prefer Mount Nathan, while Clagiraba 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.