Side by sideSuburb comparison

Coonamble vs Gilgooma.

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

Coonamble scores higher on walkability (70/100 vs 0/100 ), 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

Coonamble has a heavier family-household mix (64% vs 53%), which typically signals stronger demand for family-amenable infrastructure (parks, schools, supermarkets).

Common questionsCoonamble vs Gilgooma

Common questions

Which is more walkable, Coonamble or Gilgooma?

Coonamble scores 70/100 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

Coonamble
Metric
Gilgooma

Price & Market

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

Rental

$190/wk
Rent (house / wk)
$190/wk
$190/wk
Rent (unit / wk)
$113/wk
60.0%
Owner occupied
67.0%
33.0%
Renter occupied

Lifestyle & Demographics

70
Walk score
0
0
Transit score
0
0
Bike score
0
2,666
Population
44
38
Median age
37

Risk & Hazard

Flood class
Bushfire risk

Schools

3
Schools nearby
3
792
Avg ICSEA
792

Climate

Annual rainfall
Mean max (Jan)

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