Baw Baw vs Run-O-Waters
In both, the large majority of households own their home, the large majority of homes are detached houses, and most households are couple families. Houses cost more in Run-O-Waters: a median of $1.53 million, against $1.36 million in Baw Baw, and rent is higher there too.
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
Run-O-Waters
ahead on the one thing that separates them
- carries lower crime risk (13/100 vs 57/100)
Weighs schools, house stock, crime, parks, childcare, and who already lives there.
First-home buyers
They split
one each way, out of the 3 things we measure here
- Baw Baw has cheaper houses ($1,365,000 vs $1,532,500)
- Run-O-Waters has cheaper land ($540,000 vs $850,000)
Weighs house prices, land prices, and mortgage stress.
Renters
Baw Baw
ahead on the one thing that separates them
- has cheaper rent ($405/wk vs $475/wk)
Weighs rent, rental stress, and how much is for rent.
Commuting to the city
Run-O-Waters
ahead on 3 of the 3 things we measure here
- is more walkable (21/100 vs 0/100)
- has a shorter drive in (135 min vs 142 min)
- sits closer to the CBD (201.9 km vs 204.4 km)
Weighs distance, drive time, and walkability.
Downsizers and retirees
Run-O-Waters
ahead on 2 of the 4 things we measure here
- is more walkable (21/100 vs 0/100)
- carries lower crime risk (13/100 vs 57/100)
Weighs who already lives there, GPs, walkability, and crime.
Investors
Run-O-Waters
ahead on the one thing that separates them
- is growing faster (28.5% vs 4.2%)
Weighs population growth.
Where they sit
Baw Baw and Run-O-Waters 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
Run-O-Waters has more residents (605 vs 271); Run-O-Waters rents higher ($475/wk vs $405/wk).
| Baw Baw | Run-O-Waters | |
|---|---|---|
| Population | 271 | 605 +123% vs other |
| Population trend (2016 → 2021) | +4.2% | +28.5% |
| Median age | 45 | 46 |
| Median household income | $113,256/yr | $115,908/yr +2% vs other |
| Median weekly rent | $405/wk | $475/wk +17% vs other |
Age profile
Share of residents in each band, 2021 Census.
Bars are drawn against the largest share shown (17.7%).
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 (21.0%).
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 (3.8%).
What people live in
Occupied private dwellings by structure, 2021 Census.
Property market
| Baw Baw | Run-O-Waters | |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $1,365,000 | $1,532,500 |
| Median unit price | — same for both | |
| Median land price | $850,000 | $540,000 |
Zoning mix
Baw Baw has more land zoned for conservation (33% vs 0%); Baw Baw has more rural and farming land (67% vs 55%).
| Baw Baw | Run-O-Waters | |
|---|---|---|
| Rural and farming | 67% | 55% |
| Residential | 0% | 44% |
| Environmental | 33% | 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
| Baw Baw | Run-O-Waters | |
|---|---|---|
| New dwellings approved | 332 across Goulburn Mulwaree same for both | |
| Approvals change year on year | -1% same for both | |
Ranking within NSW
| Baw Baw | Run-O-Waters | |
|---|---|---|
| House price | Higher than 70% of NSW | Higher than 76% of NSW |
| Income | Higher than 78% of NSW | Higher than 80% of NSW |
| Schools | — same for both | |
| Walkability | Higher than 27% of NSW | Higher than 70% of NSW |
| Affordability | Higher than 50% of NSW | Higher than 43% of NSW |
| EV adoption | Higher than 49% of NSW same for both | |
| NBN connectivity | Higher than 27% of NSW | Higher than 65% of NSW |
Liveability
Run-O-Waters is more walkable (21 vs 0).
| Baw Baw | Run-O-Waters | |
|---|---|---|
| Grade | — | B |
| Score | — | 60/100 |
| Socio-economic band | advantaged area decile 7/10 | advantaged area decile 8/10 |
Risk profile
Baw Baw carries more crime risk (57 vs 13).
| Baw Baw | Run-O-Waters | |
|---|---|---|
| Bushfire | Low 21/100 | Low 20/100 |
| Crime | Moderate 57/100 | Low 13/100 |
| Flood | Not mapped no mapped data here same for both | |
| Coastal erosion | None 0/100 same for both | |
| Aircraft noise | None 0/100 same for both | |
| Industrial facilities nearby | 0 within 5 km | 4 within 5 km |
Schools
| Baw Baw | Run-O-Waters | |
|---|---|---|
| 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
| Baw Baw | Run-O-Waters | |
|---|---|---|
| Waterways | 8 | 1 |
Mobility
Baw Baw sits further from the CBD (204.4 km vs 201.9 km).
| Baw Baw | Run-O-Waters | |
|---|---|---|
| Walkability score | 0/100 | 21/100 |
| Distance to Sydney | 204.4 km +1% vs other | 201.9 km |
| Drive time (normal traffic) | 142 min | 135 min |
| Electric vehicle share | 0.5% postcode 2580 same for both | |
| Rooftop solar per 100 dwellings | 41 postcode 2580 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 (79.4%).
Setting
| Baw Baw | Run-O-Waters | |
|---|---|---|
| Elevation | 711 m above sea level, at the suburb centre | 693 m above sea level, at the suburb centre |
NBN connectivity
| Baw Baw | Run-O-Waters | |
|---|---|---|
| Connectivity score | 18/100 | 44/100 |
| Most common technology | Satellite (Sky Muster) | Fibre to the node |
| Full-fibre (FTTP) share | 2% 51 premises | 0% 211 premises |
Climate
| Baw Baw | Run-O-Waters | |
|---|---|---|
| Annual rainfall | 658 mm same for both | |
| Summer max (Jan) | 27.1°C same for both | |
| Winter min (Jul) | 2.7°C same for both | |
Air quality (annual mean)
| Baw Baw | Run-O-Waters | |
|---|---|---|
| PM2.5 | 4.8 µg/m³ same for both | |
| PM10 | 10.4 µg/m³ same for both | |
| NO₂ | 0.36 pphm same for both | |
Council rates
| Baw Baw | Run-O-Waters | |
|---|---|---|
| Average residential rate | $1,370/yr same for both | |
| Council | Goulburn Mulwaree same for both | |
Federal electorate
| Baw Baw | Run-O-Waters | |
|---|---|---|
| Division | Eden-monaro same for both | |
| Member | Kristy Mcbain same for both | |
| Party | Australian Labor Party same for both | |
First Home Owner Grant
| Baw Baw | Run-O-Waters | |
|---|---|---|
| Grant amount | $10,000 same for both | |
| Property price cap | $600,000 same for both | |
| Eligibility | New same for both | |
Tags
More comparisons
Other comparisons with Baw Baw
Other comparisons with Run-O-Waters
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.