Side by sideSuburb comparison

Good Hope Landing vs Lowbank.

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

On school quality, the average ICSEA across schools serving Lowbank (971) sits above Good Hope Landing (953). Lowbank skews owner-occupied (83%), Good Hope Landing runs more rental-dense (62% 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

Lowbank edges out on average school ICSEA (971 vs 953). Lowbank also has a higher family-household share (100% vs 62%), so the catchment community skews family-heavy.

Common questionsGood Hope Landing vs Lowbank

Common questions

Does Good Hope Landing or Lowbank have better schools?

On average school ICSEA (the ACARA index that benchmarks educational advantage), Lowbank scores 971 vs 953 in Good Hope 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

Good Hope Landing
Metric
Lowbank

Price & Market

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

Rental

$200/wk
Rent (house / wk)
$200/wk
$133/wk
Rent (unit / wk)
$170/wk
62.0%
Owner occupied
83.0%
46.0%
Renter occupied

Lifestyle & Demographics

0
Walk score
0
0
Transit score
0
0
Bike score
0
30
Population
22
54
Median age
52

Risk & Hazard

Flood class
Bushfire risk

Schools

4
Schools nearby
3
953
Avg ICSEA
971

Climate

Annual rainfall
Mean max (Jan)

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