Two neighbouring Sydney suburbs, 0.9 km apart, on the same open data. Queens Park scores higher on 6 of 10 measures.
| Queens Park | Waverley | |
|---|---|---|
| Active | 79 | 66 |
| Safety | 50 | 19 |
| Wealth | 95 | 78 |
| Value | 89 | 68 |
| Parks | 16 | 22 |
| Cafés | 82 | 92 |
| Transit | 89 | 99 |
| Green space | 88 | 38 |
| Active & healthy | 86 | 63 |
| Schools nearby (OSM) | 66 | 90 |
| Median rent | $682/wk | $630/wk |
| Median house price (Jan–Mar 2026) | $4,140,000 | $5,000,000 |
| Population | 3,143 | 4,216 |
| Full profile | Queens Park in full | Waverley in full |
Scores are percentiles across all 422 Sydney suburbs: 100 is the best in the city, 50 is mid-table. Highlighted figures lead the row. How we rank suburbs.
Queens Park scores higher for safety (recorded crime per 1,000 residents) between the two, based on official crime statistics.
Queens Park has the lower median house price of the two ($4,140,000 vs $5,000,000).
Queens Park scores higher on 6 of 10 measures across safety, activity, value, parks and cafés — see the full breakdown below, or the complete profile for Queens Park or Waverley.
Updated October 2026. Compare other Sydney suburbs →