Overall score
Pacific Haven
34.3/100
Torbanlea
22.3/100
Pacific Haven vs Torbanlea, QLD Suburb Comparison
Pacific Haven for retirees and investment; Torbanlea for value.
See which suburb leads on livability, safety, schools, and lifestyle.
Head to head
Visual comparison
Pacific HavenTorbanlea
Crime rate
Pacific Haven
41.1 / 1k
Torbanlea
133.2 / 1k
Nearby amenities
Pacific Haven
3
Torbanlea
1
Population
Pacific Haven
778
Torbanlea
841
Metric leadPacific Haven 4Torbanlea 14 tiedacross 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 retireesPacific Haven
- Best for investmentPacific Haven
- Best for best valueTorbanlea
- Best for best schoolsPacific Haven
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 | Pacific Haven | Torbanlea |
|---|---|---|
| Overall score | 34.3/100 | 22.3/100 |
| Housing (desirability) | 52.3/100 | 46.0/100 |
| Crime rate | 41.1 / 1k | 133.2 / 1k |
| Schools & preschools | — | 1 |
| Weather (desirability) | 17.2/100 | 17.2/100 |
| Parks & reserves | — | 1 |
| Walkability | 0.0/100 | 0.0/100 |
| Nearby amenities | 3 | 1 |
| Green cover | 0.0% | 0.0% |
| Population | 778 | 841 |
| SEIFA (IRSAD decile) | 1/10 | 1/10 |
Comparison summary
Put side by side, Pacific Haven is a quieter smaller community with space and a country-town pace, and Torbanlea is a quieter smaller community with space and a country-town pace.
On the data, Pacific Haven is stronger for a quieter safety profile, plus nearby cafés and amenities; Torbanlea answers with housing affordability, overall desirability, and a larger local community.
Retirees and families may find Pacific Haven the better fit, while investors, value-focused buyers, and households prioritising schools are more likely to prefer Torbanlea.
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.