Overall score
Emu Park
36.2/100
Keppel Sands
34.7/100
Emu Park vs Keppel Sands, QLD Suburb Comparison
Emu Park for retirees and value; Keppel Sands for families and investment.
See which suburb leads on livability, safety, schools, and lifestyle.
Head to head
Visual comparison
Emu ParkKeppel Sands
Crime rate
Emu Park
42.1 / 1k
Keppel Sands
71.6 / 1k
Nearby amenities
Emu Park
13
Keppel Sands
12
Population
Emu Park
2,281
Keppel Sands
374
Metric leadEmu Park 8Keppel Sands 03 tiedacross 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 retireesEmu Park
- Best for familiesKeppel Sands
- Best for investmentKeppel Sands
- Best for best valueEmu 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 | Emu Park | Keppel Sands |
|---|---|---|
| Overall score | 36.2/100 | 34.7/100 |
| Housing (desirability) | 55.1/100 | 45.7/100 |
| Crime rate | 42.1 / 1k | 71.6 / 1k |
| Schools & preschools | 1 | 1 |
| Weather (desirability) | 18.0/100 | 18.0/100 |
| Parks & reserves | 10 | 4 |
| Walkability | 0.0/100 | 0.0/100 |
| Nearby amenities | 13 | 12 |
| Green cover | 5.0% | 4.0% |
| Population | 2,281 | 374 |
| SEIFA (IRSAD decile) | 3/10 | 2/10 |
Comparison summary
Put side by side, Emu Park is a more rural smaller community that rewards people who want room to breathe, and Keppel Sands is a quieter smaller community with space and a country-town pace.
Emu Park pulls ahead on housing affordability, a quieter safety profile, and parks and reserves, whereas Keppel Sands is the better pick for a country-town feel and relatively affordable housing.
On balance, retirees, investors, and value-focused buyers are more likely to prefer Emu Park, while Keppel Sands 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.