Overall score
Clarenza
32.3/100
Grafton
45.9/100
Clarenza vs Grafton, NSW Suburb Comparison
Clarenza for schools; Grafton for retirees and families.
See which suburb leads on livability, safety, schools, and lifestyle.
Head to head
Visual comparison
ClarenzaGrafton
Crime rate
Clarenza
112.9 / 1k
Grafton
112.2 / 1k
Nearby amenities
Clarenza
1
Grafton
178
Population
Clarenza
602
Grafton
10,563
Metric leadClarenza 2Grafton 91 tiedacross 12 compared metrics
Livability profile
Desirability pillars scored 0–100 vs comparable suburbs
Quick verdicts
Clearer edge on lifestyle fit (score gap ≥ 3)
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 | Clarenza | Grafton |
|---|---|---|
| Overall score | 32.3/100 | 45.9/100 |
| Housing (desirability) | 57.3/100 | 71.3/100 |
| Crime rate | 112.9 / 1k | 112.2 / 1k |
| Schools & preschools | 2 | 4 |
| Weather (desirability) | 64.0/100 | 64.0/100 |
| Parks & reserves | — | 14 |
| Public transport stops | 44 | 148 |
| Walkability | 30.0/100 | 79.0/100 |
| Nearby amenities | 1 | 178 |
| Planning activity | 5 | 48 |
| Green cover | 0.3% | 3.1% |
| Population | 602 | 10,563 |
| SEIFA (IRSAD decile) | 6/10 | 2/10 |
Comparison summary
Put side by side, Clarenza is a slower-paced smaller community with open surrounds, and Grafton is a regional established suburb that feels self-contained without feeling remote.
Clarenza pulls ahead on housing affordability, a calmer planning outlook, and stronger socioeconomic advantage, whereas Grafton is the better pick for a quieter safety profile, schools and education options, and public transport access. Clarenza generally means housing toward the upper end of the market, while Grafton leans toward more approachable housing costs.
Retirees, families, and households prioritising schools may find Clarenza the better fit, while value-focused buyers are more likely to prefer Grafton.
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.