Lostock vs Mount Rivers
Lostock is the younger of the two, with a median age of 42 against 47 in Mount Rivers. In both, the large majority of households own their home and most homes are detached houses. In Lostock, most households are people living alone. In Mount Rivers, about half of households are people living alone. On these figures, Lostock tends to suit people living alone and families with children, while Mount Rivers suits couples.
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
Mount Rivers
ahead on 3 of the 6 things we measure here
- carries lower crime risk (27/100 vs 85/100)
- is already more of a family suburb (50% vs 30%)
- has more separate houses rather than flats (100% vs 68%)
Weighs schools, house stock, crime, parks, childcare, and who already lives there.
First-home buyers
Mount Rivers
ahead on the one thing that separates them
- leaves households under less mortgage stress (23% vs 48%)
Weighs mortgage stress.
Renters
Lostock
ahead on the one thing that separates them
- has cheaper rent ($113/wk vs $185/wk)
Weighs rent and rental stress.
Commuting to the city
Mount Rivers
ahead on 3 of the 3 things we measure here
- is more walkable (8/100 vs 0/100)
- has a shorter drive in (173 min vs 197 min)
- sits closer to the CBD (217.1 km vs 229.7 km)
Weighs distance, drive time, and walkability.
Downsizers and retirees
Mount Rivers
ahead on 2 of the 4 things we measure here
- is more walkable (8/100 vs 0/100)
- carries lower crime risk (27/100 vs 85/100)
Weighs who already lives there, GPs, walkability, and crime.
Investors
Mount Rivers
ahead on the one thing that separates them
- is growing faster (39.5% vs 12.1%)
Weighs population growth.
Where they sit
Lostock and Mount Rivers 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
Mount Rivers has higher household incomes ($97,500 vs $43,316); Mount Rivers rents higher ($185/wk vs $113/wk).
| Lostock | Mount Rivers | |
|---|---|---|
| Population | 65 +8% vs other | 60 |
| Population trend (2016 → 2021) | +12.1% | +39.5% |
| Median age | 42 | 47 |
| Median household income | $43,316/yr | $97,500/yr +125% vs other |
| Median weekly rent | $113/wk | $185/wk +64% vs other |
Age profile
Share of residents in each band, 2021 Census.
Bars are drawn against the largest share shown (21.7%).
Qualifications
Highest non-school qualification, residents 15+, 2021 Census.
Bars are drawn against the largest share shown (20.0%).
Who lives together
Household composition, 2021 Census.
Who owns and who rents
Occupied private dwellings by tenure, 2021 Census.
What people live in
Occupied private dwellings by structure, 2021 Census.
Zoning mix
Mount Rivers has more rural and farming land (98% vs 62%); Lostock has more land zoned for conservation (38% vs 2%).
| Lostock | Mount Rivers | |
|---|---|---|
| Rural and farming | 62% | 98% |
| Environmental | 38% | 2% |
| 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
| Lostock | Mount Rivers | |
|---|---|---|
| New dwellings approved | 55 across Dungog same for both | |
| Approvals change year on year | -23% same for both | |
Ranking within NSW
| Lostock | Mount Rivers | |
|---|---|---|
| House price | — same for both | |
| Income | Higher than 6% of NSW | Higher than 66% of NSW |
| Schools | — same for both | |
| Walkability | Higher than 19% of NSW | Higher than 55% of NSW |
| Affordability | — same for both | |
| EV adoption | Higher than 33% of NSW same for both | |
| NBN connectivity | Higher than 10% of NSW | Higher than 32% of NSW |
Liveability
Mount Rivers is more walkable (8 vs 0).
| Lostock | Mount Rivers | |
|---|---|---|
| Grade | — same for both | |
| Score | — same for both | |
| Socio-economic band | mid-range socio-economic decile 4/10 same for both | |
Risk profile
Lostock carries more crime risk (85 vs 27).
| Lostock | Mount Rivers | |
|---|---|---|
| Bushfire | Moderate 54/100 | Moderate 47/100 |
| Crime | High 85/100 | Low 27/100 |
| 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
| Lostock | Mount Rivers | |
|---|---|---|
| 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
| Lostock | Mount Rivers | |
|---|---|---|
| Waterways | 10 | 2 |
Mobility
Lostock sits further from the CBD (229.7 km vs 217.1 km).
| Lostock | Mount Rivers | |
|---|---|---|
| Walkability score | 0/100 | 8/100 |
| Distance to Sydney | 229.7 km +5% vs other | 217.1 km |
| Drive time (normal traffic) | 197 min | 173 min |
| Electric vehicle share | 0.3% postcode 2311 same for both | |
| Rooftop solar per 100 dwellings | 65 postcode 2311 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 (80.0%).
Setting
| Lostock | Mount Rivers | |
|---|---|---|
| Elevation | 161 m above sea level, at the suburb centre | 108 m above sea level, at the suburb centre |
NBN connectivity
| Lostock | Mount Rivers | |
|---|---|---|
| Connectivity score | 15/100 | 22/100 |
| Most common technology | Satellite (Sky Muster) same for both | |
| Full-fibre (FTTP) share | 0% 44 premises | 0% 24 premises |
Climate
| Lostock | Mount Rivers | |
|---|---|---|
| Annual rainfall | 1,026 mm same for both | |
| Summer max (Jan) | 29.9°C same for both | |
| Winter min (Jul) | 6.8°C same for both | |
Council rates
| Lostock | Mount Rivers | |
|---|---|---|
| Average residential rate | $1,646/yr same for both | |
| Council | Dungog same for both | |
Federal electorate
| Lostock | Mount Rivers | |
|---|---|---|
| Division | Lyne same for both | |
| Member | Alison Penfold same for both | |
| Party | The Nationals same for both | |
First Home Owner Grant
| Lostock | Mount Rivers | |
|---|---|---|
| Grant amount | $10,000 same for both | |
| Property price cap | $600,000 same for both | |
| Eligibility | New same for both | |
Tags
Lostock
Mount Rivers
More comparisons
Other comparisons with Lostock
Other comparisons with Mount Rivers
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.