Side by sideSuburb comparison

Carngham vs Mena Park.

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

On school quality, the average ICSEA across schools serving Carngham (1020) sits above Mena Park (994). Carngham skews owner-occupied (87%), Mena Park runs more rental-dense (58% 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

Carngham edges out on average school ICSEA (1020 vs 994). Mena Park also has a higher family-household share (92% vs 82%), so the catchment community skews family-heavy.

Common questionsCarngham vs Mena Park

Common questions

Does Carngham or Mena Park have better schools?

On average school ICSEA (the ACARA index that benchmarks educational advantage), Carngham scores 1020 vs 994 in Mena Park. ICSEA is a school-community indicator, not a quality rating, so always check NAPLAN results and catchment boundaries for the specific address you're considering.

The numbers behind the take

Carngham
Metric
Mena Park

Price & Market

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

Rental

$280/wk
Rent (house / wk)
$231/wk
$180/wk
Rent (unit / wk)
$100/wk
87.0%
Owner occupied
58.0%
Renter occupied

Lifestyle & Demographics

0
Walk score
0
0
Transit score
0
0
Bike score
0
171
Population
32
39
Median age
48

Risk & Hazard

Flood class
Bushfire risk

Schools

6
Schools nearby
4
1020
Avg ICSEA
994

Climate

612 mm
Annual rainfall
612 mm
23.2°C
Mean max (Jan)
23.2°C

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