Mount Barker vs Pakenham suburb comparison (SA vs VIC)

Mount Barker for retirees; Pakenham for families and investment.

See which suburb leads on livability, safety, schools, and lifestyle.

Head to head

Visual comparison

Mount BarkerPakenham

Overall score

Mount Barker

60.9/100

Pakenham

74.1/100

Crime rate

Mount Barker

29.4 / 1k

Pakenham

84.3 / 1k

Nearby amenities

Mount Barker

250

Pakenham

455

Population

Mount Barker

18,330

Pakenham

54,118

Metric leadMount Barker 4Pakenham 6across 10 compared metrics

Livability profile

Desirability pillars scored 0–100 vs comparable suburbs

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.

CategoryMount BarkerPakenham
Overall score60.9/10074.1/100
Housing (desirability)47.6/10081.2/100
Crime rate29.4 / 1k84.3 / 1k
Schools & preschools94
Parks & reserves24
Public transport stops64258
Walkability80.0/100100.0/100
Nearby amenities250455
Planning activity453494
Population18,33054,118
SEIFA (IRSAD decile)6/104/10

Comparison summary

Mount Barker (SA) is a leafier hillside established suburb with elevated outlooks, while Pakenham (VIC) is a well-serviced metro larger suburb with plenty happening nearby. Mount Barker sits among greener hillside streets, while Pakenham keeps a flatter suburban layout.

Mount Barker tends to lead on a quieter safety profile and schools and education options, while Pakenham stands out for housing affordability and public transport access. On housing, Mount Barker sits in a expensive band, compared with a well priced feel in Pakenham.

Mount Barker suits retirees more clearly, whereas Pakenham is the stronger match for investors and value-focused buyers.

Related comparisons