Overall score
Glen Osmond
50.5/100
Hazelwood Park
64.6/100
Glen Osmond vs Hazelwood Park, SA Suburb Comparison
Hazelwood Park for retirees and families.
See which suburb leads on livability, safety, schools, and lifestyle.
Head to head
Visual comparison
Glen OsmondHazelwood Park
Crime rate
Glen Osmond
47.6 / 1k
Hazelwood Park
14.9 / 1k
Nearby amenities
Glen Osmond
108
Hazelwood Park
85
Population
Glen Osmond
2,154
Hazelwood Park
1,953
Metric leadGlen Osmond 2Hazelwood Park 72 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 retireesHazelwood Park
- Best for familiesHazelwood Park
- Best for investmentHazelwood Park
- Best for best valueHazelwood 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 | Glen Osmond | Hazelwood Park |
|---|---|---|
| Overall score | 50.5/100 | 64.6/100 |
| Housing (desirability) | 35.1/100 | 57.5/100 |
| Crime rate | 47.6 / 1k | 14.9 / 1k |
| Weather (desirability) | 37.3/100 | 37.3/100 |
| Public transport stops | 11 | 13 |
| Walkability | 24.5/100 | 42.5/100 |
| Nearby amenities | 108 | 85 |
| Planning activity | 29 | 22 |
| Green cover | 0.3% | 15.1% |
| Population | 2,154 | 1,953 |
| SEIFA (IRSAD decile) | 10/10 | 10/10 |
Comparison summary
Glen Osmond is a well-serviced metro smaller community with plenty happening nearby, while Hazelwood Park is an energetic metro smaller community where cafés and local life overlap.
Glen Osmond pulls ahead on housing affordability, nearby cafés and amenities, and a larger local community, whereas Hazelwood Park is the better pick for a quieter safety profile, public transport access, and walkability.
Investors may find Glen Osmond the better fit, while retirees and families are more likely to prefer Hazelwood Park.
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.