Raymond Terrace vs Tomago, NSW Suburb Comparison

Raymond Terrace for families; Tomago for retirees and investment.

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

Head to head

Visual comparison

Raymond TerraceTomago

Overall score

Raymond Terrace

41.4/100

Tomago

41.1/100

Crime rate

Raymond Terrace

105.8 / 1k

Tomago

77.7 / 1k

Nearby amenities

Raymond Terrace

128

Tomago

5

Population

Raymond Terrace

13,453

Tomago

269

Metric leadRaymond Terrace 6Tomago 32 tiedacross 11 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.

CategoryRaymond TerraceTomago
Overall score41.4/10041.1/100
Housing (desirability)68.0/10084.3/100
Crime rate105.8 / 1k77.7 / 1k
Schools & preschools3—
Weather (desirability)60.5/10060.5/100
Parks & reserves10—
Public transport stops24313
Walkability59.0/10019.5/100
Nearby amenities1285
Planning activity4814
Green cover31.2%26.9%
Population13,453269
SEIFA (IRSAD decile)1/101/10

Comparison summary

Put side by side, Raymond Terrace is an energetic metro established suburb where cafés and local life overlap, and Tomago is a metro smaller community with a gently premium housing feel and familiar suburban calm. Raymond Terrace sits in a middle-ring position, whereas Tomago is further out with more breathing room.

Raymond Terrace tends to lead on housing affordability, public transport access, and walkability, while Tomago stands out for a quieter safety profile and a calmer planning outlook.

On balance, retirees, families, value-focused buyers, and households prioritising schools are more likely to prefer Raymond Terrace, while Tomago 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.

Related comparisons