Overall score
Gilead
24.7/100
St Helens Park
42.9/100
Gilead for investment; St Helens Park for retirees and families.
See which suburb leads on livability, safety, schools, and lifestyle.
Head to head
Overall score
Gilead
24.7/100
St Helens Park
42.9/100
Crime rate
Gilead
123.1 / 1k
St Helens Park
123.4 / 1k
Nearby amenities
Gilead
2
St Helens Park
51
Population
Gilead
882
St Helens Park
6,647
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 | Gilead | St Helens Park |
|---|---|---|
| Overall score | 24.7/100 | 42.9/100 |
| Housing (desirability) | 61.0/100 | 61.0/100 |
| Crime rate | 123.1 / 1k | 123.4 / 1k |
| Schools & preschools | — | 4 |
| Parks & reserves | 1 | 7 |
| Public transport stops | 4 | 76 |
| Walkability | 6.0/100 | 30.0/100 |
| Nearby amenities | 2 | 51 |
| Planning activity | 60 | 1 |
| Population | 882 | 6,647 |
| SEIFA (IRSAD decile) | 2/10 | 3/10 |
Gilead is a settled metro smaller community that keeps everyday living grounded and accessible, while St Helens Park is a lively metro mid-sized suburb with dining and everyday convenience close by. Gilead sits further out with more breathing room, whereas St Helens Park is in a middle-ring position.
Gilead pulls ahead on relatively affordable housing and a mature, settled community, whereas St Helens Park is the better pick for a quieter safety profile and parks and reserves.
Investors may find Gilead the better fit, while retirees and families are more likely to prefer St Helens Park.