Overall score
Eagle Vale
47.2/100
Kearns
44.0/100
Eagle Vale vs Kearns, NSW Suburb Comparison
Eagle Vale for retirees; Kearns for families.
See which suburb leads on livability, safety, schools, and lifestyle.
Head to head
Visual comparison
Eagle ValeKearns
Crime rate
Eagle Vale
34.2 / 1k
Kearns
34.0 / 1k
Nearby amenities
Eagle Vale
63
Kearns
27
Population
Eagle Vale
5,789
Kearns
2,693
Metric leadEagle Vale 8Kearns 41 tiedacross 13 compared metrics
Livability profile
Desirability pillars scored 0–100 vs comparable suburbs
Quick verdicts
Clearer edge on lifestyle fit (score gap ≥ 3)
- Best for retireesEagle Vale
- Best for familiesKearns
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 | Eagle Vale | Kearns |
|---|---|---|
| Overall score | 47.2/100 | 44.0/100 |
| Housing (desirability) | 44.4/100 | 44.9/100 |
| Crime rate | 34.2 / 1k | 34.0 / 1k |
| Schools & preschools | 7 | 6 |
| Weather (desirability) | 82.3/100 | 82.3/100 |
| Parks & reserves | 4 | 2 |
| Public transport stops | 82 | 29 |
| Walkability | 57.0/100 | 30.0/100 |
| Nearby amenities | 63 | 27 |
| Planning activity | 7 | 4 |
| Green cover | 15.0% | 6.4% |
| Population | 5,789 | 2,693 |
| SEIFA (IRSAD decile) | 3/10 | 6/10 |
Comparison summary
Put side by side, Eagle Vale is a well-serviced metro mid-sized suburb with plenty happening nearby, and Kearns is a sought-after metro mid-sized suburb where housing reflects strong local demand. Eagle Vale sits in a middle-ring position, whereas Kearns is further out with more breathing room.
On the data, Eagle Vale is stronger for schools and education options, parks and reserves, and public transport access; Kearns answers with a quieter safety profile, a calmer planning outlook, and stronger socioeconomic advantage.
Eagle Vale suits investors and value-focused buyers more clearly, whereas Kearns 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.