Side by sideSuburb comparison

Charnwood vs Flynn.

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

Charnwood scores higher on walkability (44/100 vs 8/100 ), useful if you're optimising for a car-light household. Flynn skews owner-occupied (83%), Charnwood runs more rental-dense (67% 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

Flynn has a heavier family-household mix (81% vs 69%), which typically signals stronger demand for family-amenable infrastructure (parks, schools, supermarkets).

Common questionsCharnwood vs Flynn

Common questions

Which is more walkable, Charnwood or Flynn?

Charnwood scores 44/100 on walkability vs 8/100. 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

Charnwood
Metric
Flynn

Price & Market

$715,000
Median house
$316,800
Median unit
+0.0%
Annual growth (house)
+0.0%
Days on market

Rental

$420/wk
Rent (house / wk)
$420/wk
$380/wk
Rent (unit / wk)
$481/wk
67.0%
Owner occupied
83.0%
31.0%
Renter occupied
16.0%

Lifestyle & Demographics

44
Walk score
8
70
Transit score
100
100
Bike score
100
3,055
Population
3,671
35
Median age
37

Risk & Hazard

Flood class
Bushfire risk

Schools

20
Schools nearby
20
1053
Avg ICSEA
1053

Climate

Annual rainfall
Mean max (Jan)

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