Overall score
Pelican
36.6/100
Swansea
46.4/100
Pelican vs Swansea, NSW Suburb Comparison
Pelican for families; Swansea for retirees and beach lifestyle.
See which suburb leads on livability, safety, schools, and lifestyle.
Head to head
Visual comparison
PelicanSwansea
Crime rate
Pelican
56.2 / 1k
Swansea
56.0 / 1k
Nearby amenities
Pelican
28
Swansea
150
Population
Pelican
874
Swansea
5,044
Metric leadPelican 2Swansea 92 tiedacross 13 compared metrics
Livability profile
Desirability pillars scored 0–100 vs comparable suburbs
Quick verdicts
Clearer edge on lifestyle fit (score gap ≥ 3)
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 | Pelican | Swansea |
|---|---|---|
| Overall score | 36.6/100 | 46.4/100 |
| Housing (desirability) | 52.2/100 | 70.9/100 |
| Crime rate | 56.2 / 1k | 56.0 / 1k |
| Schools & preschools | 4 | 4 |
| Weather (desirability) | 60.5/100 | 60.5/100 |
| Parks & reserves | 1 | 4 |
| Public transport stops | 25 | 123 |
| Walkability | 30.0/100 | 80.0/100 |
| Nearby amenities | 28 | 150 |
| Planning activity | 3 | 30 |
| Green cover | 0.2% | 2.1% |
| Population | 874 | 5,044 |
| SEIFA (IRSAD decile) | 4/10 | 2/10 |
Comparison summary
Pelican reads as a sought-after metro smaller community where housing reflects strong local demand; Swansea is a coastal mid-sized suburb shaped by beach life and outdoor living. Swansea leans into coastal living, while Pelican feels more inland and suburban in character.
Pelican tends to lead on a calmer planning outlook and stronger socioeconomic advantage, while Swansea stands out for housing affordability, a quieter safety profile, and parks and reserves.
On balance, families, people chasing a beach lifestyle, investors, and value-focused buyers are more likely to prefer Swansea, while Pelican 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.