Side by sideSuburb comparison

Gloucester vs Barrington.

Suburb-to-suburb comparison across price, growth, lifestyle, schools and risk.

Barrington scores higher on walkability (0/100 vs 4/100 ), useful if you're optimising for a car-light household. Barrington skews owner-occupied (87%), Gloucester runs more rental-dense (71% 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

Barrington has a heavier family-household mix (75% vs 63%), which typically signals stronger demand for family-amenable infrastructure (parks, schools, supermarkets).

Common questionsGloucester vs Barrington

Common questions

Which is more walkable, Gloucester or Barrington?

Barrington scores 4/100 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

Gloucester
Metric
Barrington

Price & Market

$553,000
Median house
$290,000
Median unit
+10.5%
Annual growth (house)
+0.0%
36 days
Days on market

Rental

$275/wk
Rent (house / wk)
$275/wk
$275/wk
Rent (unit / wk)
$270/wk
71.0%
Owner occupied
87.0%
26.0%
Renter occupied
9.0%

Lifestyle & Demographics

0
Walk score
4
0
Transit score
0
0
Bike score
0
3,133
Population
394
55
Median age
55

Risk & Hazard

Flood class
Bushfire risk

Schools

4
Schools nearby
4
975
Avg ICSEA
975

Climate

Annual rainfall
Mean max (Jan)

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