Overall score
Ludmilla
51.6/100
Stuart Park
55.3/100
Ludmilla vs Stuart Park, NT suburb comparison
Ludmilla for investment and value; Stuart Park for retirees and families.
See which suburb leads on livability, safety, schools, and lifestyle.
Head to head
Visual comparison
LudmillaStuart Park
Nearby amenities
Ludmilla
55
Stuart Park
124
Population
Ludmilla
1,667
Stuart Park
4,101
Metric leadLudmilla 1Stuart Park 8across 9 compared metrics
Livability profile
Desirability pillars scored 0–100 vs comparable suburbs
Quick verdicts
Clearer edge on lifestyle fit (score gap ≥ 3)
- Best for retireesStuart Park
- Best for familiesStuart Park
- Best for investmentLudmilla
- Best for best valueLudmilla
- Best for best schoolsStuart Park
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 | Ludmilla | Stuart Park |
|---|---|---|
| Overall score | 51.6/100 | 55.3/100 |
| Housing (desirability) | 48.8/100 | 11.6/100 |
| Schools & preschools | 3 | 7 |
| Parks & reserves | 5 | 8 |
| Public transport stops | 13 | 15 |
| Walkability | 36.5/100 | 49.5/100 |
| Nearby amenities | 55 | 124 |
| Population | 1,667 | 4,101 |
| SEIFA (IRSAD decile) | 5/10 | 10/10 |
Comparison summary
Put side by side, Ludmilla is an energetic metro smaller community where cafés and local life overlap, and Stuart Park is a well-serviced metro mid-sized suburb with plenty happening nearby.
On the data, Ludmilla is stronger for housing affordability; Stuart Park answers with a quieter safety profile and parks and reserves. On housing, Ludmilla sits in a well priced band, compared with a expensive feel in Stuart Park.
Investors and value-focused buyers may find Ludmilla the better fit, while retirees and families are more likely to prefer Stuart Park.