Side by sideSuburb comparison

Glen Innes vs Stonehenge.

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

Glen Innes scores higher on walkability (12/100 vs 0/100 ), useful if you're optimising for a car-light household. Stonehenge skews owner-occupied (89%), Glen Innes 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

Stonehenge has a heavier family-household mix (87% vs 60%), which typically signals stronger demand for family-amenable infrastructure (parks, schools, supermarkets).

Common questionsGlen Innes vs Stonehenge

Common questions

Which is more walkable, Glen Innes or Stonehenge?

Glen Innes scores 12/100 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

Glen Innes
Metric
Stonehenge

Price & Market

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

Rental

$225/wk
Rent (house / wk)
$225/wk
$230/wk
Rent (unit / wk)
$200/wk
66.0%
Owner occupied
89.0%
29.0%
Renter occupied
8.0%

Lifestyle & Demographics

12
Walk score
0
0
Transit score
0
0
Bike score
0
6,219
Population
136
49
Median age
55

Risk & Hazard

Flood class
Bushfire risk

Schools

4
Schools nearby
4
942
Avg ICSEA
942

Climate

Annual rainfall
Mean max (Jan)

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