Overall score
Mango Hill
51.5/100
Rothwell
49.2/100
Mango Hill vs Rothwell, QLD Suburb Comparison
Mango Hill for retirees; Rothwell for beach lifestyle and investment.
See which suburb leads on livability, safety, schools, and lifestyle.
Head to head
Visual comparison
Mango HillRothwell
Crime rate
Mango Hill
57.9 / 1k
Rothwell
112.0 / 1k
Nearby amenities
Mango Hill
303
Rothwell
176
Population
Mango Hill
14,921
Rothwell
7,538
Metric leadMango Hill 7Rothwell 32 tiedacross 12 compared metrics
Livability profile
Desirability pillars scored 0–100 vs comparable suburbs
Quick verdicts
Clearer edge on lifestyle fit (score gap ≥ 3)
- Best for retireesMango Hill
- Best for beach lifestyleRothwell
- Best for investmentRothwell
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 | Mango Hill | Rothwell |
|---|---|---|
| Overall score | 51.5/100 | 49.2/100 |
| Housing (desirability) | 49.2/100 | 57.0/100 |
| Crime rate | 57.9 / 1k | 112.0 / 1k |
| Schools & preschools | 4 | 2 |
| Weather (desirability) | 31.2/100 | 31.2/100 |
| Parks & reserves | 9 | 15 |
| Public transport stops | 29 | 23 |
| Walkability | 88.0/100 | 88.0/100 |
| Nearby amenities | 303 | 176 |
| Green cover | 4.0% | 7.4% |
| Population | 14,921 | 7,538 |
| SEIFA (IRSAD decile) | 8/10 | 2/10 |
Comparison summary
Mango Hill is a coastal established suburb shaped by beach life and outdoor living, while Rothwell is a beachside mid-sized suburb where the coast sets the tone.
Mango Hill pulls ahead on a quieter safety profile, schools and education options, and public transport access, whereas Rothwell is the better pick for parks and reserves.
On balance, retirees, families, value-focused buyers, and households prioritising schools are more likely to prefer Mango Hill, while Rothwell 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.