Side by sideSuburb comparison

Ashford vs Wallangra.

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

Ashford scores higher on walkability (14/100 vs 0/100 ), useful if you're optimising for a car-light household. Ashford skews owner-occupied (72%), Wallangra runs more rental-dense (59% owner).

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

Wallangra has a heavier family-household mix (78% vs 62%), which typically signals stronger demand for family-amenable infrastructure (parks, schools, supermarkets).

Common questionsAshford vs Wallangra

Common questions

Which is more walkable, Ashford or Wallangra?

Ashford scores 14/100 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

Ashford
Metric
Wallangra

Price & Market

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

Rental

$185/wk
Rent (house / wk)
$270/wk
$185/wk
Rent (unit / wk)
$290/wk
72.0%
Owner occupied
59.0%
20.0%
Renter occupied
22.0%

Lifestyle & Demographics

14
Walk score
0
0
Transit score
0
0
Bike score
0
659
Population
93
54
Median age
42

Risk & Hazard

Flood class
Bushfire risk

Schools

2
Schools nearby
2
880
Avg ICSEA
880

Climate

Annual rainfall
Mean max (Jan)

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