Overall score
Clapham
47.2/100
Cumberland Park
53.9/100
Clapham vs Cumberland Park, SA Suburb Comparison
Clapham for families and value; Cumberland Park for investment.
See which suburb leads on livability, safety, schools, and lifestyle.
Head to head
Visual comparison
ClaphamCumberland Park
Crime rate
Clapham
16.3 / 1k
Cumberland Park
57.3 / 1k
Nearby amenities
Clapham
25
Cumberland Park
103
Population
Clapham
1,685
Cumberland Park
2,571
Metric leadClapham 3Cumberland Park 81 tiedacross 12 compared metrics
Livability profile
Desirability pillars scored 0–100 vs comparable suburbs
Quick verdicts
Clearer edge on lifestyle fit (score gap ≥ 3)
- Best for familiesClapham
- Best for investmentCumberland Park
- Best for best valueClapham
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 | Clapham | Cumberland Park |
|---|---|---|
| Overall score | 47.2/100 | 53.9/100 |
| Housing (desirability) | 62.2/100 | 72.2/100 |
| Crime rate | 16.3 / 1k | 57.3 / 1k |
| Schools & preschools | 1 | 1 |
| Weather (desirability) | 37.3/100 | 56.4/100 |
| Public transport stops | 6 | 12 |
| Walkability | 9.0/100 | 70.0/100 |
| Nearby amenities | 25 | 103 |
| Planning activity | 24 | 33 |
| Green cover | 0.4% | 2.8% |
| Population | 1,685 | 2,571 |
| SEIFA (IRSAD decile) | 10/10 | 9/10 |
Comparison summary
Clapham is a sought-after metro smaller community where housing reflects strong local demand, while Cumberland Park is a lively metro mid-sized suburb with dining and everyday convenience close by.
Clapham tends to lead on housing affordability, a quieter safety profile, and a calmer planning outlook, while Cumberland Park stands out for public transport access, walkability, and nearby cafés and amenities.
Retirees, families, and investors may find Clapham the better fit, while households prioritising schools are more likely to prefer Cumberland Park.
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.