Side by sideSuburb comparison

Gretna vs Rosegarland.

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

Gretna skews owner-occupied (86%), Rosegarland runs more rental-dense (74% 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

Gretna has a heavier family-household mix (79% vs 69%), which typically signals stronger demand for family-amenable infrastructure (parks, schools, supermarkets).

The numbers behind the take

Gretna
Metric
Rosegarland

Price & Market

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

Rental

$270/wk
Rent (house / wk)
$270/wk
$200/wk
Rent (unit / wk)
$250/wk
86.0%
Owner occupied
74.0%
17.0%
Renter occupied
9.0%

Lifestyle & Demographics

0
Walk score
0
0
Transit score
0
0
Bike score
0
254
Population
92
38
Median age
47

Risk & Hazard

Flood class
Bushfire risk

Schools

6
Schools nearby
6
902
Avg ICSEA
902

Climate

586 mm
Annual rainfall
586 mm
21.8°C
Mean max (Jan)
21.8°C

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