Overall score
Gordon Park
56.2/100
Kalinga
57.8/100
Gordon Park vs Kalinga, QLD Suburb Comparison
Gordon Park for investment; Kalinga for retirees and families.
See which suburb leads on livability, safety, schools, and lifestyle.
Head to head
Visual comparison
Gordon ParkKalinga
Crime rate
Gordon Park
68.8 / 1k
Kalinga
79.5 / 1k
Nearby amenities
Gordon Park
53
Kalinga
109
Population
Gordon Park
4,390
Kalinga
2,144
Metric leadGordon Park 4Kalinga 62 tiedacross 12 compared metrics
Livability profile
Desirability pillars scored 0–100 vs comparable suburbs
Quick verdicts
Clearer edge on lifestyle fit (score gap ≥ 3)
- Best for retireesKalinga
- Best for familiesKalinga
- Best for investmentGordon 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 | Gordon Park | Kalinga |
|---|---|---|
| Overall score | 56.2/100 | 57.8/100 |
| Housing (desirability) | 77.5/100 | 44.6/100 |
| Crime rate | 68.8 / 1k | 79.5 / 1k |
| Schools & preschools | 12 | 14 |
| Weather (desirability) | 42.8/100 | 42.8/100 |
| Parks & reserves | 2 | 5 |
| Public transport stops | 17 | 19 |
| Walkability | 33.5/100 | 30.5/100 |
| Nearby amenities | 53 | 109 |
| Green cover | 2.7% | 27.4% |
| Population | 4,390 | 2,144 |
| SEIFA (IRSAD decile) | 10/10 | 10/10 |
Comparison summary
Gordon Park reads as a lively metro mid-sized suburb with dining and everyday convenience close by; Kalinga is a well-serviced metro smaller community with plenty happening nearby.
Gordon Park pulls ahead on a quieter safety profile, walkability, and a larger local community, whereas Kalinga is the better pick for schools and education options, parks and reserves, and public transport access.
Neither suburb has a sharp audience split here. The better choice between Gordon Park and Kalinga comes down to which lifestyle trade-offs matter most to you.
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.