Side by sideSuburb comparison

Fisher vs Marks Landing.

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

On school quality, the average ICSEA across schools serving Fisher (953) sits above Marks Landing (937). Fisher skews owner-occupied (82%), Marks Landing 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

Fisher edges out on average school ICSEA (953 vs 937). Marks Landing also has a higher family-household share (83% vs 41%), so the catchment community skews family-heavy.

Common questionsFisher vs Marks Landing

Common questions

Does Fisher or Marks Landing have better schools?

On average school ICSEA (the ACARA index that benchmarks educational advantage), Fisher scores 953 vs 937 in Marks Landing. 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

Fisher
Metric
Marks Landing

Price & Market

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

Rental

$200/wk
Rent (house / wk)
$200/wk
$100/wk
Rent (unit / wk)
$170/wk
82.0%
Owner occupied
58.0%
Renter occupied

Lifestyle & Demographics

0
Walk score
0
0
Transit score
0
0
Bike score
0
61
Population
63
59
Median age
67

Risk & Hazard

Flood class
Bushfire risk

Schools

2
Schools nearby
3
953
Avg ICSEA
937

Climate

448 mm
Annual rainfall
448 mm
27.9°C
Mean max (Jan)
27.9°C

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