Side by sideSuburb comparison

Mckail vs Lockyer.

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

Lockyer scores higher on walkability (0/100 vs 14/100 ), useful if you're optimising for a car-light household. Mckail skews owner-occupied (73%), Lockyer runs more rental-dense (50% 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

Mckail has a heavier family-household mix (78% vs 58%), which typically signals stronger demand for family-amenable infrastructure (parks, schools, supermarkets).

Common questionsMckail vs Lockyer

Common questions

Which is more walkable, Mckail or Lockyer?

Lockyer scores 14/100 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

Mckail
Metric
Lockyer

Price & Market

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

Rental

$300/wk
Rent (house / wk)
$300/wk
$350/wk
Rent (unit / wk)
$230/wk
73.0%
Owner occupied
50.0%
25.0%
Renter occupied
45.0%

Lifestyle & Demographics

0
Walk score
14
0
Transit score
0
0
Bike score
50
3,970
Population
1,298
34
Median age
40

Risk & Hazard

Flood class
Bushfire risk

Schools

15
Schools nearby
15
988
Avg ICSEA
988

Climate

Annual rainfall
Mean max (Jan)

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