Overall score
Kilgariff
30.4/100
Mount Johns
29.8/100
Kilgariff vs Mount Johns, NT suburb comparison
Kilgariff for investment and value; Mount Johns for retirees and families.
See which suburb leads on livability, safety, schools, and lifestyle.
Head to head
Visual comparison
KilgariffMount Johns
Nearby amenities
Kilgariff
6
Mount Johns
0
Population
Kilgariff
551
Mount Johns
541
Metric leadKilgariff 5Mount Johns 1across 6 compared metrics
Livability profile
Desirability pillars scored 0–100 vs comparable suburbs
Quick verdicts
Clearer edge on lifestyle fit (score gap ≥ 3)
- Best for retireesMount Johns
- Best for familiesMount Johns
- Best for investmentKilgariff
- Best for best valueKilgariff
- Best for best schoolsKilgariff
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 | Kilgariff | Mount Johns |
|---|---|---|
| Overall score | 30.4/100 | 29.8/100 |
| Housing (desirability) | 59.9/100 | 7.6/100 |
| Schools & preschools | 1 | — |
| Parks & reserves | 2 | — |
| Public transport stops | 3 | — |
| Walkability | 4.5/100 | 0.0/100 |
| Nearby amenities | 6 | 0 |
| Population | 551 | 541 |
| SEIFA (IRSAD decile) | 6/10 | 10/10 |
Comparison summary
Kilgariff reads as a quieter smaller community with space and a country-town pace; Mount Johns is a hillside smaller community with greener streets and a quieter pace. Mount Johns sits among greener hillside streets, while Kilgariff keeps a flatter suburban layout.
Kilgariff pulls ahead on housing affordability and a quieter safety profile, whereas Mount Johns is the better pick for stronger socioeconomic advantage. Kilgariff generally means more mid-market housing value, while Mount Johns leans toward more sought-after housing.
Choose Kilgariff if you are weighing investors and value-focused buyers; lean toward Mount Johns for retirees.