Side by sideSuburb comparison

Beresford vs Strathalbyn.

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

Beresford scores higher on walkability (8/100 vs 0/100 ), useful if you're optimising for a car-light household. Strathalbyn skews owner-occupied (90%), Beresford runs more rental-dense (56% 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

Strathalbyn has a heavier family-household mix (86% vs 60%), which typically signals stronger demand for family-amenable infrastructure (parks, schools, supermarkets).

Common questionsBeresford vs Strathalbyn

Common questions

Which is more walkable, Beresford or Strathalbyn?

Beresford scores 8/100 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

Beresford
Metric
Strathalbyn

Price & Market

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

Rental

$250/wk
Rent (house / wk)
$250/wk
$250/wk
Rent (unit / wk)
$318/wk
56.0%
Owner occupied
90.0%
42.0%
Renter occupied
9.0%

Lifestyle & Demographics

8
Walk score
0
0
Transit score
0
0
Bike score
30
1,463
Population
1,165
45
Median age
43

Risk & Hazard

Flood class
Bushfire risk

Schools

20
Schools nearby
20
921
Avg ICSEA
921

Climate

Annual rainfall
Mean max (Jan)

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