Side by sideSuburb comparison

Caloundra West vs Little Mountain.

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

Little Mountain scores higher on walkability (4/100 vs 8/100 ), useful if you're optimising for a car-light household. Little Mountain skews owner-occupied (76%), Caloundra West runs more rental-dense (66% 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

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 questionsCaloundra West vs Little Mountain

Common questions

Which is more walkable, Caloundra West or Little Mountain?

Little Mountain scores 8/100 on walkability vs 4/100. 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

Caloundra West
Metric
Little Mountain

Price & Market

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

Rental

$690/wk
Rent (house / wk)
$750/wk
$465/wk
Rent (unit / wk)
$461/wk
66.0%
Owner occupied
76.0%
32.0%
Renter occupied
18.0%

Lifestyle & Demographics

4
Walk score
8
0
Transit score
0
100
Bike score
100
7,270
Population
11,068
37
Median age
44

Risk & Hazard

Flood class
Bushfire risk

Schools

20
Schools nearby
20
1040
Avg ICSEA
1040

Climate

1068 mm
Annual rainfall
1068 mm
30.4°C
Mean max (Jan)
30.4°C

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