Overall score
Clarenza
32.3/100
Tucabia
29.4/100
Clarenza vs Tucabia, NSW Suburb Comparison
Clarenza for investment and value; Tucabia for retirees and families.
See which suburb leads on livability, safety, schools, and lifestyle.
Head to head
Visual comparison
ClarenzaTucabia
Crime rate
Clarenza
112.9 / 1k
Tucabia
69.3 / 1k
Nearby amenities
Clarenza
1
Tucabia
32
Population
Clarenza
602
Tucabia
354
Metric leadClarenza 5Tucabia 52 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 | Tucabia |
|---|---|---|
| Overall score | 32.3/100 | 29.4/100 |
| Housing (desirability) | 57.3/100 | 66.5/100 |
| Crime rate | 112.9 / 1k | 69.3 / 1k |
| Schools & preschools | 2 | 1 |
| Weather (desirability) | 64.0/100 | 64.0/100 |
| Parks & reserves | — | 1 |
| Public transport stops | 44 | 45 |
| Walkability | 30.0/100 | 30.0/100 |
| Nearby amenities | 1 | 32 |
| Planning activity | 5 | 4 |
| Green cover | 0.3% | 0.2% |
| Population | 602 | 354 |
| SEIFA (IRSAD decile) | 6/10 | 1/10 |
Comparison summary
Clarenza is a slower-paced smaller community with open surrounds, while Tucabia is a regional smaller community with local services and a more relaxed pace.
Clarenza tends to lead on housing affordability, schools and education options, and overall desirability, while Tucabia stands out for a quieter safety profile, public transport access, and nearby cafés and amenities. On housing, Clarenza sits in a gently premium band, compared with a affordable feel in Tucabia.
On balance, retirees, families, investors, value-focused buyers, and households prioritising schools are more likely to prefer Clarenza, while Tucabia 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.