Overall score
Mount Louisa
34.0/100
Shaw
38.7/100
Mount Louisa vs Shaw, QLD Suburb Comparison
Mount Louisa for investment and value; Shaw for families.
See which suburb leads on livability, safety, schools, and lifestyle.
Head to head
Visual comparison
Mount LouisaShaw
Crime rate
Mount Louisa
183.8 / 1k
Shaw
65.3 / 1k
Nearby amenities
Mount Louisa
15
Shaw
5
Population
Mount Louisa
9,227
Shaw
760
Metric leadMount Louisa 5Shaw 42 tiedacross 11 compared metrics
Livability profile
Desirability pillars scored 0–100 vs comparable suburbs
Quick verdicts
Clearer edge on lifestyle fit (score gap ≥ 3)
- Best for familiesShaw
- Best for investmentMount Louisa
- Best for best valueMount Louisa
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 | Mount Louisa | Shaw |
|---|---|---|
| Overall score | 34.0/100 | 38.7/100 |
| Housing (desirability) | 53.5/100 | 59.3/100 |
| Crime rate | 183.8 / 1k | 65.3 / 1k |
| Schools & preschools | 2 | 2 |
| Weather (desirability) | 19.8/100 | 19.8/100 |
| Parks & reserves | 8 | 2 |
| Walkability | 25.0/100 | 0.0/100 |
| Nearby amenities | 15 | 5 |
| Green cover | 1.6% | 0.4% |
| Population | 9,227 | 760 |
| SEIFA (IRSAD decile) | 6/10 | 7/10 |
Comparison summary
Mount Louisa is a hills established suburb where tree cover and calm define the mood, while Shaw is a quieter smaller community with space and a country-town pace. Mount Louisa sits among greener hillside streets, while Shaw keeps a flatter suburban layout.
On the data, Mount Louisa is stronger for housing affordability, parks and reserves, and walkability; Shaw answers with a quieter safety profile and stronger socioeconomic advantage. On housing, Mount Louisa sits in a expensive band, compared with a gently premium feel in Shaw.
Investors and value-focused buyers may find Mount Louisa the better fit, while retirees and families are more likely to prefer Shaw.
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.