Overall score
Guanaba
46.3/100
Maudsland
42.4/100
Guanaba vs Maudsland, QLD Suburb Comparison
Guanaba for investment and schools; Maudsland for retirees and families.
See which suburb leads on livability, safety, schools, and lifestyle.
Head to head
Visual comparison
GuanabaMaudsland
Crime rate
Guanaba
46.5 / 1k
Maudsland
46.3 / 1k
Nearby amenities
Guanaba
5
Maudsland
7
Population
Guanaba
852
Maudsland
8,073
Metric leadGuanaba 2Maudsland 71 tiedacross 10 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 | Guanaba | Maudsland |
|---|---|---|
| Overall score | 46.3/100 | 42.4/100 |
| Housing (desirability) | 48.4/100 | 39.8/100 |
| Crime rate | 46.5 / 1k | 46.3 / 1k |
| Weather (desirability) | 42.8/100 | 42.8/100 |
| Parks & reserves | 1 | 6 |
| Public transport stops | — | 3 |
| Walkability | 0.0/100 | 4.5/100 |
| Nearby amenities | 5 | 7 |
| Green cover | 0.3% | 8.5% |
| Population | 852 | 8,073 |
| SEIFA (IRSAD decile) | 8/10 | 9/10 |
Comparison summary
Put side by side, Guanaba is a sought-after metro smaller community where housing reflects strong local demand, and Maudsland is a sought-after metro established suburb where housing reflects strong local demand.
Maudsland holds the clearer edge on a quieter safety profile, parks and reserves, and walkability, while Guanaba is closer across the remaining categories. Guanaba generally means housing toward the upper end of the market, while Maudsland leans toward more sought-after housing.
On balance, retirees, families, value-focused buyers, and households prioritising schools are more likely to prefer Maudsland, while Guanaba 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.