Side by sideSuburb comparison

Ambrose vs Mount Larcom.

Suburb-to-suburb comparison across price, growth, lifestyle, schools and risk. Mount Larcom edges out on more headline metrics in this comparison.

Mount Larcom scores higher on walkability (0/100 vs 4/100 ), useful if you're optimising for a car-light household.

The takeWhich suburb suits which buyer

For buyers

We don't yet have verified suburb-level medians for one or both of these suburbs. Check the individual profiles for the data we do publish, and the methodology page for how we source it.

For investors

Rental or growth data is incomplete for one or both suburbs. Look at the full investor view on each suburb profile for a complete picture.

For families

School and household data is too similar between the two to call a winner on family fit. Check the individual profiles for street-level school catchments.

Common questionsAmbrose vs Mount Larcom

Common questions

Which is more walkable, Ambrose or Mount Larcom?

Mount Larcom scores 4/100 on walkability vs 0/100. Above 70 is considered very walkable (most errands on foot), 50-69 is walkable for some errands, below 50 typically requires a car for daily life.

The numbers behind the take

Ambrose
Metric
Mount Larcom

Price & Market

Median house
Median unit
+0.0%
Annual growth (house)
+0.0%
Days on market

Rental

$200/wk
Rent (house / wk)
$200/wk
$165/wk
Rent (unit / wk)
$190/wk
73.0%
Owner occupied
81.0%
11.0%
Renter occupied
19.0%

Lifestyle & Demographics

0
Walk score
4
0
Transit score
10
0
Bike score
0
217
Population
332
43
Median age
42

Risk & Hazard

Flood class
Bushfire risk

Schools

2
Schools nearby
2
909
Avg ICSEA
909

Climate

Annual rainfall
Mean max (Jan)

Green dot = better on that metric (lower price, higher growth, higher walkability, lower risk).