Side by sideSuburb comparison

Beargamil vs Parkes.

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

Parkes scores higher on walkability (0/100 vs 36/100 ), 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 questionsBeargamil vs Parkes

Common questions

Which is more walkable, Beargamil or Parkes?

Parkes scores 36/100 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

Beargamil
Metric
Parkes

Price & Market

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

Rental

$260/wk
Rent (house / wk)
$260/wk
$221/wk
Rent (unit / wk)
$260/wk
Owner occupied
66.0%
Renter occupied
29.0%

Lifestyle & Demographics

0
Walk score
36
0
Transit score
10
0
Bike score
75
12,036
Population
11,324
39
Median age
39

Risk & Hazard

Flood class
Bushfire risk

Schools

6
Schools nearby
6
939
Avg ICSEA
939

Climate

414 mm
Annual rainfall
33.5°C
Mean max (Jan)

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