Harkness vs Melton South, VIC Suburb Comparison

Harkness for investment and value; Melton South for retirees.

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

Head to head

Visual comparison

HarknessMelton South

Overall score

Harkness

35.7/100

Melton South

37.4/100

Crime rate

Harkness

45.4 / 1k

Melton South

89.0 / 1k

Nearby amenities

Harkness

34

Melton South

192

Population

Harkness

12,463

Melton South

11,362

Metric leadHarkness 5Melton South 71 tiedacross 13 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.

CategoryHarknessMelton South
Overall score35.7/10037.4/100
Housing (desirability)42.5/10039.5/100
Crime rate45.4 / 1k89.0 / 1k
Schools & preschools16
Weather (desirability)82.3/10082.3/100
Parks & reserves25
Public transport stops3341
Walkability30.0/10080.0/100
Nearby amenities34192
Planning activity1961
Green cover4.4%8.5%
Population12,46311,362
SEIFA (IRSAD decile)3/101/10

Comparison summary

Put side by side, Harkness is a practical metro established suburb with approachable housing and suburban calm, and Melton South is a lively metro established suburb with dining and everyday convenience close by. Harkness sits further out with more breathing room, whereas Melton South is in a middle-ring position.

Harkness tends to lead on housing affordability, a quieter safety profile, and a calmer planning outlook, while Melton South stands out for schools and education options, parks and reserves, and public transport access.

On balance, retirees, families, investors, and value-focused buyers are more likely to prefer Harkness, while Melton South 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.

Related comparisons