Overall score
Voyager Point
55.4/100
Warwick Farm
40.6/100
Voyager Point for retirees and families; Warwick Farm for investment.
See which suburb leads on livability, safety, schools, and lifestyle.
Head to head
Overall score
Voyager Point
55.4/100
Warwick Farm
40.6/100
Crime rate
Voyager Point
13.0 / 1k
Warwick Farm
168.6 / 1k
Nearby amenities
Voyager Point
29
Warwick Farm
156
Population
Voyager Point
1,678
Warwick Farm
6,135
Desirability pillars scored 0–100 vs comparable suburbs
Clearer edge on lifestyle fit (score gap ≥ 3)
Who each suburb suits — composite scores out of 100
Side-by-side scores for every compared metric.
Exact figures for every metric — winner highlighted in bold.
| Category | Voyager Point | Warwick Farm |
|---|---|---|
| Overall score | 55.4/100 | 40.6/100 |
| Housing (desirability) | 41.5/100 | 50.9/100 |
| Crime rate | 13.0 / 1k | 168.6 / 1k |
| Schools & preschools | 5 | 10 |
| Weather (desirability) | 82.3/100 | 82.3/100 |
| Parks & reserves | 1 | 2 |
| Public transport stops | 21 | 58 |
| Walkability | 30.0/100 | 44.0/100 |
| Nearby amenities | 29 | 156 |
| Planning activity | 1 | 16 |
| Green cover | 58.0% | 15.7% |
| Population | 1,678 | 6,135 |
| SEIFA (IRSAD decile) | 10/10 | 1/10 |
Put side by side, Voyager Point is a sought-after metro smaller community where housing reflects strong local demand, and Warwick Farm is an energetic metro mid-sized suburb where cafés and local life overlap. Voyager Point sits further out with more breathing room, whereas Warwick Farm is in a middle-ring position.
Voyager Point tends to lead on housing affordability, a quieter safety profile, and a calmer planning outlook, while Warwick Farm stands out for schools and education options, parks and reserves, and public transport access.
On balance, retirees, families, investors, value-focused buyers, and households prioritising schools are more likely to prefer Voyager Point, while Warwick Farm 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.