Overall score
Pakenham
46.4/100
Gosnells
43.9/100
Pakenham vs Gosnells Suburb Comparison (VIC vs WA)
Pakenham for investment and value; Gosnells for families.
See which suburb leads on livability, safety, schools, and lifestyle.
Head to head
Visual comparison
PakenhamGosnells
Crime rate
Pakenham
84.3 / 1k
Gosnells
63.7 / 1k
Nearby amenities
Pakenham
488
Gosnells
791
Population
Pakenham
54,118
Gosnells
21,149
Metric leadPakenham 7Gosnells 5across 12 compared metrics
Livability profile
Desirability pillars scored 0–100 vs comparable suburbs
Quick verdicts
Clearer edge on lifestyle fit (score gap ≥ 3)
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 | Pakenham | Gosnells |
|---|---|---|
| Overall score | 46.4/100 | 43.9/100 |
| Housing (desirability) | 55.0/100 | 50.0/100 |
| Crime rate | 84.3 / 1k | 63.7 / 1k |
| Schools & preschools | 4 | 7 |
| Weather (desirability) | 82.3/100 | 23.4/100 |
| Parks & reserves | 24 | 40 |
| Public transport stops | 258 | 143 |
| Walkability | 100.0/100 | 70.0/100 |
| Nearby amenities | 488 | 791 |
| Planning activity | 494 | — |
| Green cover | 4.4% | 10.3% |
| Population | 54,118 | 21,149 |
| SEIFA (IRSAD decile) | 4/10 | 1/10 |
Comparison summary
Pakenham (VIC) is a well-serviced metro larger suburb with plenty happening nearby, while Gosnells (WA) is a well-serviced metro established suburb with plenty happening nearby.
On the data, Pakenham is stronger for housing affordability, public transport access, and walkability; Gosnells answers with a quieter safety profile, schools and education options, and parks and reserves. On housing, Pakenham sits in a gently premium band, compared with a expensive feel in Gosnells.
On balance, retirees, families, investors, and value-focused buyers are more likely to prefer Pakenham, while Gosnells 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.