Overall score
Maudsland
42.4/100
Pacific Pines
56.2/100
Maudsland for schools; Pacific Pines for retirees and investment.
See which suburb leads on livability, safety, schools, and lifestyle.
Head to head
Overall score
Maudsland
42.4/100
Pacific Pines
56.2/100
Crime rate
Maudsland
46.3 / 1k
Pacific Pines
57.1 / 1k
Nearby amenities
Maudsland
7
Pacific Pines
208
Population
Maudsland
8,073
Pacific Pines
16,664
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 | Maudsland | Pacific Pines |
|---|---|---|
| Overall score | 42.4/100 | 56.2/100 |
| Housing (desirability) | 39.8/100 | 44.1/100 |
| Crime rate | 46.3 / 1k | 57.1 / 1k |
| Schools & preschools | — | 4 |
| Weather (desirability) | 42.8/100 | 42.8/100 |
| Parks & reserves | 6 | 20 |
| Public transport stops | 3 | 54 |
| Walkability | 4.5/100 | 100.0/100 |
| Nearby amenities | 7 | 208 |
| Green cover | 8.5% | 16.9% |
| Population | 8,073 | 16,664 |
| SEIFA (IRSAD decile) | 9/10 | 7/10 |
Maudsland reads as a sought-after metro established suburb where housing reflects strong local demand; Pacific Pines is a well-serviced metro established suburb with plenty happening nearby. Maudsland sits further out with more breathing room, whereas Pacific Pines is in a middle-ring position.
Maudsland tends to lead on a quieter safety profile and stronger socioeconomic advantage, while Pacific Pines stands out for parks and reserves, public transport access, and walkability.
Retirees, families, and households prioritising schools may find Maudsland the better fit, while value-focused buyers are more likely to prefer Pacific Pines.
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.