Guys Hill vs Officer, VIC Suburb Comparison

Guys Hill for schools; Officer for retirees and investment.

See which suburb leads on livability, safety, schools, and lifestyle.

Head to head

Visual comparison

Guys HillOfficer

Overall score

Guys Hill

50.6/100

Officer

47.4/100

Crime rate

Guys Hill

33.3 / 1k

Officer

64.1 / 1k

Nearby amenities

Guys Hill

8

Officer

145

Population

Guys Hill

388

Officer

18,503

Metric leadGuys Hill 4Officer 61 tiedacross 11 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.

CategoryGuys HillOfficer
Overall score50.6/10047.4/100
Housing (desirability)43.6/10049.8/100
Crime rate33.3 / 1k64.1 / 1k
Schools & preschools—7
Weather (desirability)82.3/10082.3/100
Parks & reserves16
Public transport stops—55
Walkability2.0/10055.0/100
Nearby amenities8145
Planning activity10159
Green cover5.9%12.9%
Population38818,503
SEIFA (IRSAD decile)10/108/10

Comparison summary

Put side by side, Guys Hill is a sought-after metro smaller community where housing reflects strong local demand, and Officer is a lively metro established suburb with dining and everyday convenience close by. Guys Hill sits further out with more breathing room, whereas Officer is in a middle-ring position.

On the data, Guys Hill is stronger for housing affordability, a quieter safety profile, and a calmer planning outlook; Officer answers with parks and reserves, walkability, and nearby cafés and amenities. On housing, Guys Hill sits in a expensive band, compared with a gently premium feel in Officer.

Guys Hill suits retirees more clearly, whereas Officer is the stronger match for families, investors, value-focused buyers, and households prioritising schools.

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.

Related comparisons