Oaklands vs Urana.
Comparing two suburbs with median house prices of $220,000 and $220,000. Oaklands edges out on more headline metrics in this comparison.
Oaklands and Urana have near-identical medians ($220,000 vs $220,000). Over the past year, Oaklands (-4.3%) ran 11.1 percentage points ahead of Urana (-15.4%) on house-price growth.
Urana scores higher on walkability (0/100 vs 2/100 ), useful if you're optimising for a car-light household. On school quality, the average ICSEA across schools serving Oaklands (950) sits above Urana (902).
For buyers
The two suburbs land at similar price points ($220,000 vs $220,000), so the buying decision usually comes down to lifestyle fit rather than affordability.
For investors
Oaklands has run faster on 12-month capital growth, favouring growth-led investors.
For families
Oaklands edges out on average school ICSEA (950 vs 902).
Common questions
Which has stronger property growth, Oaklands or Urana?
Over the past 12 months, Oaklands grew -4.3% vs -15.4% in Urana, a gap of 11.1 percentage points. Twelve-month growth can swing year to year, so weight long-run trends from the individual suburb profiles before making a buy decision.
Does Oaklands or Urana have better schools?
On average school ICSEA (the ACARA index that benchmarks educational advantage), Oaklands scores 950 vs 902 in Urana. 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.
Which is more walkable, Oaklands or Urana?
Urana scores 2/100 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
Price & Market
Rental
Lifestyle & Demographics
Risk & Hazard
Schools
Climate
Green dot = better on that metric (lower price, higher growth, higher walkability, lower risk).
Compare Oaklands against another suburb