Bannerton vs Happy Valley
Bannerton is the younger of the two, with a median age of 32 against 39 in Happy Valley. In both, most households own their home, the large majority of homes are detached houses, and most households are couple families. On these figures, Bannerton tends to suit young adults and families with children.
Which one suits you?
There is no overall winner — the suburb that suits a family with school-age kids is routinely the wrong one for someone commuting into the city. So each of these answers its own question, against a checklist you can see, using the same figures in the tables below.
Families with school-age kids
Happy Valley
ahead on the one thing that separates them
- has more separate houses rather than flats (100% vs 86%)
Weighs schools, house stock, crime, parks, childcare, and who already lives there.
First-home buyers
Too close to call
Nothing among the 1 things we measure here separates them by enough to be worth acting on.
Weighs mortgage stress.
Renters
Bannerton
ahead on the one thing that separates them
- has a bigger rental market to choose from (40% vs 24%)
Weighs rent, rental stress, and how much is for rent.
Commuting to the city
Bannerton
ahead on 2 of the 3 things we measure here
- has a shorter drive in (308 min vs 318 min)
- sits closer to the CBD (448.5 km vs 460.4 km)
Weighs distance, drive time, and walkability.
Downsizers and retirees
Too close to call
Nothing among the 4 things we measure here separates them by enough to be worth acting on.
Weighs who already lives there, GPs, walkability, and crime.
Investors
Bannerton
ahead on the one thing that separates them
- is growing faster (95.0% vs -7.4%)
Weighs population growth.
Where they sit
Bannerton and Happy Valley drawn to the same scale. Both outlines are shown together, so the map answers whether they share a border and how their areas compare.
Bars start at zero. Scores, risks and rankings are drawn against their full 0–100 range; other rows are drawn in proportion to the larger of the two.
Side by side, out of 100
Risks are inverted — shown as safety and low exposure — so a longer bar always means better.
Demographics
Happy Valley skews older (39 vs 32).
| Bannerton | Happy Valley | |
|---|---|---|
| Population | 78 +4% vs other | 75 |
| Population trend (2016 → 2021) | +95.0% | -7.4% |
| Median age | 32 | 39 |
| Median household income | $71,500/yr +5% vs other | $68,224/yr |
| Median weekly rent | $230/wk +5% vs other | $218/wk |
Age profile
Share of residents in each band, 2021 Census.
Bars are drawn against the largest share shown (21.8%).
Who lives together
Household composition, 2021 Census.
Who owns and who rents
Occupied private dwellings by tenure, 2021 Census.
Qualifications
Highest non-school qualification, residents 15+, 2021 Census.
Bars are drawn against the largest share shown (19.2%).
Where residents were born
Largest overseas birthplaces, as a share of all residents, 2021 Census. A dash means that country is not among the suburb's own eight largest.
Bars are drawn against the largest share shown (5.3%).
What people live in
Occupied private dwellings by structure, 2021 Census.
Zoning mix
Bannerton has more rural and farming land (94% vs 64%).
| Bannerton | Happy Valley | |
|---|---|---|
| Rural and farming | 94% | 64% |
| Parks and recreation | 4% | 35% |
| Infrastructure and transport | 2% | 0% |
| Zoning sets what may be built, not what is there today. A single address can sit in a different zone to the suburb around it. Zones as at 2026-09. | ||
Development activity
| Bannerton | Happy Valley | |
|---|---|---|
| New dwellings approved | 91 across Swan Hill same for both | |
| Approvals change year on year | -86% same for both | |
Ranking within VIC
| Bannerton | Happy Valley | |
|---|---|---|
| House price | — same for both | |
| Income | Higher than 36% of VIC | Higher than 29% of VIC |
| Schools | — same for both | |
| Walkability | Higher than 50% of VIC | Higher than 13% of VIC |
| Affordability | — same for both | |
| EV adoption | Higher than 1% of VIC same for both | |
| NBN connectivity | Higher than 66% of VIC | Higher than 52% of VIC |
Liveability
| Bannerton | Happy Valley | |
|---|---|---|
| Grade | — same for both | |
| Score | — same for both | |
| Socio-economic band | below-average income decile 3/10 | mid-range socio-economic decile 4/10 |
Risk profile
Happy Valley carries more flood risk (30 vs 17); Happy Valley carries more bushfire risk (28 vs 17).
| Bannerton | Happy Valley | |
|---|---|---|
| Bushfire | Low 17/100 | Low 28/100 |
| Crime | High 82/100 | High 73/100 |
| Flood | Low 17/100 | Low 30/100 |
| Coastal erosion | None 0/100 same for both | |
| Aircraft noise | None 0/100 same for both | |
| Industrial facilities nearby | 0 within 5 km same for both | |
Schools
| Bannerton | Happy Valley | |
|---|---|---|
| Inside the suburb | 0 same for both | |
| Rated above peers | 0 same for both | |
| Rated at peers | 0 same for both | |
| Rated below peers | 0 same for both | |
Amenities in the suburb
| Bannerton | Happy Valley | |
|---|---|---|
| Parks & reserves | 3 | 1 |
Mobility
Happy Valley sits further from the CBD (460.4 km vs 448.5 km).
| Bannerton | Happy Valley | |
|---|---|---|
| Walkability score | 0/100 same for both | |
| Distance to Melbourne | 448.5 km | 460.4 km +3% vs other |
| Drive time (normal traffic) | 308 min | 318 min |
| Electric vehicle share | 0.1% postcode 3549 same for both | |
| Rooftop solar per 100 dwellings | 49 postcode 3549 same for both | |
How people get to work
Method of travel on census day 2021 — which fell during COVID restrictions, so working from home is inflated and every travel mode understated.
Bars are drawn against the largest share shown (87.5%).
Setting
| Bannerton | Happy Valley | |
|---|---|---|
| Elevation | 64 m above sea level, at the suburb centre | 77 m above sea level, at the suburb centre |
NBN connectivity
| Bannerton | Happy Valley | |
|---|---|---|
| Connectivity score | 30/100 same for both | |
| Most common technology | Fixed wireless same for both | |
| Full-fibre (FTTP) share | 0% 26 premises | 0% 33 premises |
Council rates
| Bannerton | Happy Valley | |
|---|---|---|
| Average residential rate | $2,333/yr same for both | |
| Council | Swan Hill same for both | |
Federal electorate
| Bannerton | Happy Valley | |
|---|---|---|
| Division | Mallee same for both | |
| Member | Anne Webster same for both | |
| Party | The Nationals same for both | |
First Home Owner Grant
| Bannerton | Happy Valley | |
|---|---|---|
| Grant amount | $10,000 same for both | |
| Property price cap | $750,000 same for both | |
| Eligibility | New same for both | |
Tags
Bannerton
Happy Valley
More comparisons
Other comparisons with Bannerton
Other comparisons with Happy Valley
Information shown is provided as-is from Australian government and commercial data sources.
Always verify with the relevant authority before making property decisions.
See Data Sources and How We Calculate for details.