Overall score
Fig Tree Pocket
63.0/100
Seventeen Mile Rocks
59.6/100
Fig Tree Pocket for investment; Seventeen Mile Rocks for retirees and families.
See which suburb leads on livability, safety, schools, and lifestyle.
Head to head
Overall score
Fig Tree Pocket
63.0/100
Seventeen Mile Rocks
59.6/100
Crime rate
Fig Tree Pocket
14.7 / 1k
Seventeen Mile Rocks
41.6 / 1k
Nearby amenities
Fig Tree Pocket
155
Seventeen Mile Rocks
160
Population
Fig Tree Pocket
4,345
Seventeen Mile Rocks
2,699
Desirability pillars scored 0–100 vs comparable suburbs
Clearer edge on lifestyle fit (score gap ≥ 3)
Who each suburb suits — composite scores out of 100
Side-by-side scores for every compared metric.
Exact figures for every metric — winner highlighted in bold.
| Category | Fig Tree Pocket | Seventeen Mile Rocks |
|---|---|---|
| Overall score | 63.0/100 | 59.6/100 |
| Housing (desirability) | 44.9/100 | 53.2/100 |
| Crime rate | 14.7 / 1k | 41.6 / 1k |
| Schools & preschools | 5 | 2 |
| Weather (desirability) | 42.8/100 | 42.8/100 |
| Parks & reserves | 8 | 5 |
| Public transport stops | 25 | 9 |
| Walkability | 34.0/100 | 15.5/100 |
| Nearby amenities | 155 | 160 |
| Green cover | 13.3% | 29.0% |
| Population | 4,345 | 2,699 |
| SEIFA (IRSAD decile) | 10/10 | 10/10 |
Put side by side, Fig Tree Pocket is a well-serviced metro mid-sized suburb with plenty happening nearby, and Seventeen Mile Rocks is a well-serviced metro mid-sized suburb with plenty happening nearby. Fig Tree Pocket sits closer to the city centre, whereas Seventeen Mile Rocks is in a middle-ring position.
Fig Tree Pocket pulls ahead on a quieter safety profile, schools and education options, and parks and reserves, whereas Seventeen Mile Rocks is the better pick for nearby cafés and amenities.
On balance, retirees, families, value-focused buyers, and households prioritising schools are more likely to prefer Fig Tree Pocket, while Seventeen Mile Rocks 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.