Compare
Manningham vs Whitehorse
Council (LGA) comparison ≈ 6.9 km apart · Manningham profile · Whitehorse profile
Manningham Whitehorse
Whitehorse and Manningham are neighbouring areas in Melbourne with distinct living patterns. Whitehorse is more walkable, with 99% of homes within a 15-minute walk of a school and 97.3% near groceries. It also has a higher crime rate, with recorded offences far higher than in Manningham. In contrast, Manningham has larger homes, with 83.6% having three or more bedrooms, compared to 72.5% in Whitehorse. Manningham is also older; the typical resident is 43, while in Whitehorse they are 39.
Both areas share very similar typical weekly household incomes, around $1,800 to $1,900. They also have nearly identical shares of children under 15 and people who speak little or no English. While they have much in common, some gaps are changing; for instance, the difference in the number of people using another language at home has narrowed since 2011. Meanwhile, the age gap between the two has widened over the same period.
Where they differ most
Demographics & Identity
- First area, 2011: 111,300
- First area, 2016: 116,255
- First area, 2021: 124,700
- Second area, 2011: 151,334
- Second area, 2016: 162,078
- Second area, 2021: 169,346
- First area, 2011: 42 yrs
- First area, 2016: 43 yrs
- First area, 2021: 43 yrs
- Second area, 2011: 39 yrs
- Second area, 2016: 38 yrs
- Second area, 2021: 39 yrs
Age structure
Marital status
Age & sex structure
Bars show the share of each area's own population, so differently sized areas stay comparable.
- 85+ in Manningham: 1.6% males, 2.1% females; 85+ in Whitehorse: 1.2% males, 2.0% females
- 80–84 in Manningham: 1.7% males, 2.0% females; 80–84 in Whitehorse: 1.2% males, 1.7% females
- 75–79 in Manningham: 2.0% males, 2.4% females; 75–79 in Whitehorse: 1.5% males, 1.9% females
- 70–74 in Manningham: 2.3% males, 2.8% females; 70–74 in Whitehorse: 1.9% males, 2.3% females
- 65–69 in Manningham: 2.5% males, 2.9% females; 65–69 in Whitehorse: 2.2% males, 2.6% females
- 60–64 in Manningham: 2.9% males, 3.2% females; 60–64 in Whitehorse: 2.5% males, 2.8% females
- 55–59 in Manningham: 3.1% males, 3.5% females; 55–59 in Whitehorse: 2.7% males, 3.0% females
- 50–54 in Manningham: 3.3% males, 3.6% females; 50–54 in Whitehorse: 3.1% males, 3.5% females
- 45–49 in Manningham: 3.1% males, 3.4% females; 45–49 in Whitehorse: 3.2% males, 3.5% females
- 40–44 in Manningham: 3.1% males, 3.3% females; 40–44 in Whitehorse: 3.1% males, 3.4% females
- 35–39 in Manningham: 3.0% males, 3.5% females; 35–39 in Whitehorse: 3.5% males, 3.7% females
- 30–34 in Manningham: 2.8% males, 2.9% females; 30–34 in Whitehorse: 3.4% males, 3.6% females
- 25–29 in Manningham: 2.6% males, 2.5% females; 25–29 in Whitehorse: 3.7% males, 3.3% females
- 20–24 in Manningham: 3.1% males, 2.8% females; 20–24 in Whitehorse: 4.0% males, 3.6% females
- 15–19 in Manningham: 3.1% males, 2.8% females; 15–19 in Whitehorse: 3.0% males, 2.9% females
- 10–14 in Manningham: 3.0% males, 2.9% females; 10–14 in Whitehorse: 2.9% males, 2.9% females
- 5–9 in Manningham: 3.0% males, 2.8% females; 5–9 in Whitehorse: 2.9% males, 2.7% females
- 0–4 in Manningham: 2.2% males, 2.2% females; 0–4 in Whitehorse: 2.4% males, 2.2% females
Ancestry & Birthplace
Country of birth
Ancestry
Language
Language used at home
Religion
Religious affiliation
Education & Qualifications
Highest year of school
Highest qualification level
Field of qualification
Income
- First area, 2011: $571
- First area, 2016: $629
- First area, 2021: $756
- Second area, 2011: $561
- Second area, 2016: $619
- Second area, 2021: $778
- First area, 2011: $1,467
- First area, 2016: $1,642
- First area, 2021: $1,920
- Second area, 2011: $1,317
- Second area, 2016: $1,507
- Second area, 2021: $1,841
- First area, 2011: $1,713
- First area, 2016: $1,895
- First area, 2021: $2,252
- Second area, 2011: $1,682
- Second area, 2016: $1,916
- Second area, 2021: $2,300
Household income distribution
Personal income distribution
Health & Disability
Long-term health conditions reported
Number of long-term health conditions
Community Participation
First Nations
Family & Households
- First area, 2011: 2.8
- First area, 2016: 2.8
- First area, 2021: 2.7
- Second area, 2011: 2.6
- Second area, 2016: 2.6
- Second area, 2021: 2.6
Family composition
Household size
Housing & Dwellings
- First area, 2011: $360
- First area, 2016: $415
- First area, 2021: $462
- Second area, 2011: $320
- Second area, 2016: $376
- Second area, 2021: $411
- First area, 2011: $2,000
- First area, 2016: $2,050
- First area, 2021: $2,400
- Second area, 2011: $1,950
- Second area, 2016: $2,000
- Second area, 2021: $2,231
- First area, 2011: 1.10
- First area, 2016: 0.80
- First area, 2021: 0.80
- Second area, 2011: 1.10
- Second area, 2016: 0.90
- Second area, 2021: 0.80
How homes are owned or rented
Types of homes
Bedrooms per home
Weekly rent distribution
Monthly mortgage distribution
Transport & Vehicles
How people get to work
Motor vehicles per home
Migration & Movement
Jobs & Industry
Industries people work in
Occupations people work in
Economy & Advantage
Environment & Climate
Crime & Safety
Walkability
Compare Manningham with nearby areas
Compare Whitehorse with nearby areas
Cite this page
Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2021). Manningham vs Whitehorse [Census of Population and Housing]. CensusAtlas, used under CC BY 4.0. https://censusatlas.au/compare/lga/LGA24210/manningham/vs/LGA26980/whitehorse