Kalorama vs Silvan, VIC Suburb Comparison

Kalorama for families and schools; Silvan for retirees.

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

Head to head

Visual comparison

KaloramaSilvan

Overall score

Kalorama

51.7/100

Silvan

43.9/100

Crime rate

Kalorama

35.8 / 1k

Silvan

36.7 / 1k

Nearby amenities

Kalorama

155

Silvan

18

Population

Kalorama

1,277

Silvan

1,323

Metric leadKalorama 7Silvan 23 tiedacross 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.

CategoryKaloramaSilvan
Overall score51.7/10043.9/100
Housing (desirability)39.5/10030.3/100
Crime rate35.8 / 1k36.7 / 1k
Schools & preschools—1
Weather (desirability)82.3/10082.3/100
Parks & reserves22
Public transport stops2121
Walkability32.0/10030.0/100
Nearby amenities15518
Planning activity2345
Green cover4.2%18.9%
Population1,2771,323
SEIFA (IRSAD decile)9/108/10

Comparison summary

Kalorama reads as a leafier hillside smaller community with elevated outlooks; Silvan is a leafier hillside smaller community with elevated outlooks. Kalorama sits in a middle-ring position, whereas Silvan is further out with more breathing room.

Kalorama pulls ahead on a quieter safety profile, walkability, and nearby cafés and amenities, whereas Silvan is the better pick for housing affordability, overall desirability, and a larger local community. Kalorama generally means more sought-after housing, while Silvan leans toward housing toward the upper end of the market.

On balance, retirees, families, investors, value-focused buyers, and households prioritising schools are more likely to prefer Silvan, while Kalorama 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