Overall score
Colac
35.9/100
Irrewarra
41.4/100
Colac vs Irrewarra, VIC Suburb Comparison
Colac for retirees and families; Irrewarra for investment and schools.
See which suburb leads on livability, safety, schools, and lifestyle.
Head to head
Visual comparison
ColacIrrewarra
Crime rate
Colac
160.0 / 1k
Irrewarra
107.8 / 1k
Nearby amenities
Colac
6
Irrewarra
3
Population
Colac
9,243
Irrewarra
365
Metric leadColac 6Irrewarra 41 tiedacross 11 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 | Colac | Irrewarra |
|---|---|---|
| Overall score | 35.9/100 | 41.4/100 |
| Housing (desirability) | 74.0/100 | 60.7/100 |
| Crime rate | 160.0 / 1k | 107.8 / 1k |
| Schools & preschools | 7 | — |
| Weather (desirability) | 82.3/100 | 82.3/100 |
| Parks & reserves | 13 | 1 |
| Public transport stops | 58 | — |
| Walkability | 30.0/100 | 0.0/100 |
| Nearby amenities | 6 | 3 |
| Planning activity | 23 | 2 |
| Green cover | 0.8% | 0.1% |
| Population | 9,243 | 365 |
| SEIFA (IRSAD decile) | 1/10 | 7/10 |
Comparison summary
Put side by side, Colac is a slower-paced established suburb with open surrounds, and Irrewarra is a more rural smaller community that rewards people who want room to breathe.
Colac pulls ahead on a quieter safety profile, parks and reserves, and walkability, whereas Irrewarra is the better pick for housing affordability, a calmer planning outlook, and stronger socioeconomic advantage. Colac generally means more approachable housing costs, while Irrewarra leans toward housing toward the upper end of the market.
Colac suits families, investors, value-focused buyers, and households prioritising schools more clearly, whereas Irrewarra is the stronger match for retirees.
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.