Geraldton vs Mount Tarcoola, WA Suburb Comparison

Geraldton for retirees and families; Mount Tarcoola for value.

See which suburb leads on livability, safety, schools, and lifestyle.

Head to head

Visual comparison

GeraldtonMount Tarcoola

Overall score

Geraldton

53.8/100

Mount Tarcoola

36.5/100

Crime rate

Geraldton

132.8 / 1k

Mount Tarcoola

132.8 / 1k

Nearby amenities

Geraldton

643

Mount Tarcoola

39

Population

Geraldton

3,246

Mount Tarcoola

3,257

Metric leadGeraldton 6Mount Tarcoola 33 tiedacross 12 compared metrics

Livability profile

Desirability pillars scored 0–100 vs comparable suburbs

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.

CategoryGeraldtonMount Tarcoola
Overall score53.8/10036.5/100
Housing (desirability)57.1/10051.7/100
Crime rate132.8 / 1k132.8 / 1k
Schools & preschools113
Weather (desirability)2.8/1002.8/100
Parks & reserves77
Public transport stops3719
Walkability100.0/10028.5/100
Nearby amenities64339
Green cover3.1%7.1%
Population3,2463,257
SEIFA (IRSAD decile)2/105/10

Comparison summary

Put side by side, Geraldton is a regional mid-sized suburb with local services and a more relaxed pace, and Mount Tarcoola is a hillside mid-sized suburb with greener streets and a quieter pace. Mount Tarcoola sits among greener hillside streets, while Geraldton keeps a flatter suburban layout.

Geraldton tends to lead on schools and education options, public transport access, and walkability, while Mount Tarcoola stands out for housing affordability, a larger local community, and stronger socioeconomic advantage. On housing, Geraldton sits in a affordable band, compared with a gently premium feel in Mount Tarcoola.

Families and households prioritising schools may find Geraldton the better fit, while retirees and investors are more likely to prefer Mount Tarcoola.

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.

Related comparisons