Cedar Creek vs Mount Glorious
Cedar Creek is the younger of the two, with a median age of 43 against 49 in Mount Glorious. In both, the large majority of households own their home and the large majority of homes are detached houses. In Cedar Creek, the large majority of households are couple families. Houses cost more in Cedar Creek: a median of $1.9 million, against $987,000 in Mount Glorious, and rent is higher there too. Cedar Creek is closer to the city centre: 32.4 km, against 37.5 km. On these figures, Cedar Creek tends to suit families with children and couples, while Mount Glorious suits people living alone, older residents, and buyers on a tighter budget.
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
Cedar Creek
ahead on the one thing that separates them
- is already more of a family suburb (89% vs 52%)
Weighs schools, house stock, crime, parks, childcare, and who already lives there.
First-home buyers
Mount Glorious
ahead on the one thing that separates them
- has cheaper houses ($987,175 vs $1,900,000)
Weighs house prices and mortgage stress.
Renters
Mount Glorious
ahead on the one thing that separates them
- has cheaper rent ($363/wk vs $600/wk)
Weighs rent, rental stress, and how much is for rent.
Commuting to the city
Cedar Creek
ahead on 2 of the 3 things we measure here
- has a shorter drive in (44 min vs 56 min)
- sits closer to the CBD (32.4 km vs 37.5 km)
Weighs distance, drive time, and walkability.
Downsizers and retirees
Mount Glorious
ahead on the one thing that separates them
- has more residents already 65 and over (23% vs 14%)
Weighs who already lives there, GPs, walkability, and crime.
Investors
Too close to call
Nothing among the 1 things we measure here separates them by enough to be worth acting on.
Weighs population growth.
Where they sit
Cedar Creek and Mount Glorious 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
Cedar Creek has more residents (831 vs 343); Cedar Creek has higher household incomes ($169,000 vs $100,048).
| Cedar Creek | Mount Glorious | |
|---|---|---|
| Population | 831 +59% vs other | 343 |
| Population trend (2016 → 2021) | +11.5% | +15.9% |
| Median age | 43 | 49 |
| Median household income | $169,000/yr +41% vs other | $100,048/yr |
| Median weekly rent | $600/wk +40% vs other | $363/wk |
Age profile
Share of residents in each band, 2021 Census.
Bars are drawn against the largest share shown (19.2%).
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 (22.7%).
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 (9.6%).
What people live in
Occupied private dwellings by structure, 2021 Census.
Property market
| Cedar Creek | Mount Glorious | |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $1,900,000 | $987,175 |
| Median unit price | — same for both | |
| Median land price | — same for both | |
| Typical days to sell (houses) | 163 days from 4 sales | — |
Development activity
| Cedar Creek | Mount Glorious | |
|---|---|---|
| New dwellings approved | 6,996 across Moreton Bay same for both | |
| Approvals change year on year | +49% same for both | |
Ranking within QLD
| Cedar Creek | Mount Glorious | |
|---|---|---|
| House price | — same for both | |
| Income | Higher than 98% of QLD | Higher than 74% of QLD |
| Schools | — same for both | |
| Walkability | Higher than 29% of QLD | Higher than 61% of QLD |
| Affordability | — same for both | |
| EV adoption | Higher than 96% of QLD same for both | |
| NBN connectivity | Higher than 36% of QLD | Higher than 33% of QLD |
Liveability
| Cedar Creek | Mount Glorious | |
|---|---|---|
| Grade | A | — |
| Score | 68/100 | — |
| Socio-economic band | very advantaged area decile 10/10 | very advantaged area decile 9/10 |
Risk profile
Mount Glorious carries more bushfire risk (79 vs 41).
| Cedar Creek | Mount Glorious | |
|---|---|---|
| Bushfire | Moderate 41/100 | High 79/100 |
| Crime | Low 14/100 | Low 12/100 |
| 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 same for both | |
Schools
| Cedar Creek | Mount Glorious | |
|---|---|---|
| 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
| Cedar Creek | Mount Glorious | |
|---|---|---|
| Cafes & restaurants | 0 | 2 |
| Parks & reserves | 3 | 1 |
| Waterways | 1 | 4 |
Mobility
Mount Glorious sits further from the CBD (37.5 km vs 32.4 km).
| Cedar Creek | Mount Glorious | |
|---|---|---|
| Walkability score | 0/100 same for both | |
| Distance to Brisbane | 32.4 km | 37.5 km +16% vs other |
| Drive time (normal traffic) | 44 min | 56 min |
| Electric vehicle share | 2.4% postcode 4520 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 (57.4%).
Setting
| Cedar Creek | Mount Glorious | |
|---|---|---|
| Elevation | 118 m above sea level, at the suburb centre | 291 m above sea level, at the suburb centre |
| Distance to the ocean | 21.4 km | 25.4 km |
NBN connectivity
| Cedar Creek | Mount Glorious | |
|---|---|---|
| Connectivity score | 27/100 | 25/100 |
| Most common technology | Fixed wireless same for both | |
| Full-fibre (FTTP) share | 0% 194 premises | 0% 86 premises |
Climate
| Cedar Creek | Mount Glorious | |
|---|---|---|
| Annual rainfall | — | 950 mm |
| Summer max (Jan) | — same for both | |
| Winter min (Jul) | — same for both | |
Air quality (annual mean)
| Cedar Creek | Mount Glorious | |
|---|---|---|
| PM2.5 | 4.6 µg/m³ same for both | |
| PM10 | 13.4 µg/m³ same for both | |
| NO₂ | 0.74 pphm same for both | |
Council rates
| Cedar Creek | Mount Glorious | |
|---|---|---|
| Average residential rate | $1,577/yr same for both | |
| Council | Moreton Bay same for both | |
Federal electorate
| Cedar Creek | Mount Glorious | |
|---|---|---|
| Division | Dickson same for both | |
| Member | Ali France same for both | |
| Party | Australian Labor Party same for both | |
First Home Owner Grant
| Cedar Creek | Mount Glorious | |
|---|---|---|
| Grant amount | $30,000 same for both | |
| Property price cap | $750,000 same for both | |
| Eligibility | New same for both | |
Tags
Cedar Creek
Mount Glorious
More comparisons
Other comparisons with Cedar Creek
Other comparisons with Mount Glorious
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.