Overall score
Daw Park
46.8/100
Torrens Park
62.2/100
Daw Park vs Torrens Park, SA Suburb Comparison
Daw Park for value; Torrens Park for families and investment.
See which suburb leads on livability, safety, schools, and lifestyle.
Head to head
Visual comparison
Daw ParkTorrens Park
Crime rate
Daw Park
30.3 / 1k
Torrens Park
36.8 / 1k
Nearby amenities
Daw Park
79
Torrens Park
68
Population
Daw Park
2,705
Torrens Park
2,687
Metric leadDaw Park 6Torrens Park 5across 11 compared metrics
Livability profile
Desirability pillars scored 0–100 vs comparable suburbs
Quick verdicts
Clearer edge on lifestyle fit (score gap ≥ 3)
- Best for familiesTorrens Park
- Best for investmentTorrens Park
- Best for best valueDaw Park
- Best for best schoolsTorrens Park
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 | Daw Park | Torrens Park |
|---|---|---|
| Overall score | 46.8/100 | 62.2/100 |
| Housing (desirability) | 59.2/100 | 54.4/100 |
| Crime rate | 30.3 / 1k | 36.8 / 1k |
| Schools & preschools | 1 | — |
| Weather (desirability) | 56.4/100 | 37.3/100 |
| Public transport stops | 15 | 23 |
| Walkability | 53.5/100 | 80.0/100 |
| Nearby amenities | 79 | 68 |
| Planning activity | 27 | 41 |
| Green cover | 0.6% | 1.3% |
| Population | 2,705 | 2,687 |
| SEIFA (IRSAD decile) | 7/10 | 10/10 |
Comparison summary
Daw Park is an energetic metro mid-sized suburb where cafés and local life overlap, while Torrens Park is an energetic metro mid-sized suburb where cafés and local life overlap.
Daw Park pulls ahead on housing affordability, a quieter safety profile, and nearby cafés and amenities, whereas Torrens Park is the better pick for public transport access, walkability, and tree cover and green space.
Daw Park suits investors more clearly, whereas Torrens Park is the stronger match for retirees, families, value-focused buyers, and households prioritising schools.
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.