Overall score
Kilgariff
34.2/100
Mount Johns
38.1/100
Kilgariff for retirees and families.
See which suburb leads on livability, safety, schools, and lifestyle.
Head to head
Overall score
Kilgariff
34.2/100
Mount Johns
38.1/100
Nearby amenities
Kilgariff
6
Mount Johns
0
Population
Kilgariff
551
Mount Johns
541
Desirability pillars scored 0–100 vs comparable suburbs
Clearer edge on lifestyle fit (score gap ≥ 3)
Who each suburb suits — composite scores out of 100
Side-by-side scores for every compared metric.
Exact figures for every metric — winner highlighted in bold.
| Category | Kilgariff | Mount Johns |
|---|---|---|
| Overall score | 34.2/100 | 38.1/100 |
| Housing (desirability) | 30.8/100 | 46.8/100 |
| Schools & preschools | 1 | — |
| Weather (desirability) | 1.6/100 | 1.6/100 |
| Parks & reserves | 2 | — |
| Public transport stops | 3 | — |
| Walkability | 4.5/100 | 0.0/100 |
| Nearby amenities | 6 | 0 |
| Green cover | 0.0% | 0.0% |
| Population | 551 | 541 |
| SEIFA (IRSAD decile) | 6/10 | 10/10 |
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, walkability, and nearby cafés and amenities, 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, value-focused buyers, and households prioritising schools; lean toward Mount Johns for retirees and families.
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.