Side by sideSuburb comparison

Mount Burnett vs Pakenham Upper.

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

On school quality, the average ICSEA across schools serving Mount Burnett (1021) sits above Pakenham Upper (1013).

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

Mount Burnett edges out on average school ICSEA (1021 vs 1013). Mount Burnett also has a higher family-household share (100% vs 84%), so the catchment community skews family-heavy.

Common questionsMount Burnett vs Pakenham Upper

Common questions

Does Mount Burnett or Pakenham Upper have better schools?

On average school ICSEA (the ACARA index that benchmarks educational advantage), Mount Burnett scores 1021 vs 1013 in Pakenham Upper. 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

Mount Burnett
Metric
Pakenham Upper

Price & Market

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

Rental

$370/wk
Rent (house / wk)
$351/wk
$200/wk
Rent (unit / wk)
$255/wk
98.0%
Owner occupied
94.0%
6.0%
Renter occupied
3.0%

Lifestyle & Demographics

0
Walk score
0
0
Transit score
0
0
Bike score
0
180
Population
1,196
42
Median age
44

Risk & Hazard

Flood class
Bushfire risk

Schools

8
Schools nearby
20
1021
Avg ICSEA
1013

Climate

639 mm
Annual rainfall
639 mm
25.9°C
Mean max (Jan)
25.9°C

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