Side by sideSuburb comparison

Stotts Creek vs North Tumbulgum.

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

On school quality, the average ICSEA across schools serving Stotts Creek (1002) sits above North Tumbulgum (993). Stotts Creek skews owner-occupied (133%), North Tumbulgum runs more rental-dense (76% 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

Stotts Creek edges out on average school ICSEA (1002 vs 993). Stotts Creek also has a higher family-household share (100% vs 86%), so the catchment community skews family-heavy.

Common questionsStotts Creek vs North Tumbulgum

Common questions

Does Stotts Creek or North Tumbulgum have better schools?

On average school ICSEA (the ACARA index that benchmarks educational advantage), Stotts Creek scores 1002 vs 993 in North Tumbulgum. 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

Stotts Creek
Metric
North Tumbulgum

Price & Market

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

Rental

$480/wk
Rent (house / wk)
$350/wk
$100/wk
Rent (unit / wk)
$275/wk
133.0%
Owner occupied
76.0%
Renter occupied
15.0%

Lifestyle & Demographics

0
Walk score
0
0
Transit score
0
0
Bike score
0
10
Population
238
48
Median age
39

Risk & Hazard

Flood class
Bushfire risk

Schools

20
Schools nearby
20
1002
Avg ICSEA
993

Climate

1304 mm
Annual rainfall
1304 mm
28.9°C
Mean max (Jan)
28.9°C

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