Port Melbourne vs South Wharf.
Suburb-to-suburb comparison across price, growth, lifestyle, schools and risk.
South Wharf scores higher on walkability (32/100 vs 100/100 ), useful if you're optimising for a car-light household. On school quality, the average ICSEA across schools serving Port Melbourne (1112) sits above South Wharf (1078). Port Melbourne skews owner-occupied (54%), South Wharf runs more rental-dense (30% owner).
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
Port Melbourne edges out on average school ICSEA (1112 vs 1078). South Wharf also has a higher family-household share (87% vs 59%), so the catchment community skews family-heavy.
Common questions
Does Port Melbourne or South Wharf have better schools?
On average school ICSEA (the ACARA index that benchmarks educational advantage), Port Melbourne scores 1112 vs 1078 in South Wharf. 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, Port Melbourne or South Wharf?
South Wharf scores 100/100 on walkability vs 32/100. 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 Port Melbourne against another suburb