What does this Machinery Operators & Drivers ranking show?

This ranking shows ACT suburbs with the highest Machinery Operators & Drivers worker counts, based on Census 2021 demographic data.

Should I choose a suburb just because it ranks highly here?

No. Demographic rankings explain local context, not investment quality by themselves. Use them with price, rent, income, schools, transport, and detail-page evidence before shortlisting.

Why does QuickProperty show count and percentage of population?

The count shows the size of the local group, while the percentage helps avoid overreading large suburbs that rank highly only because they have more residents overall.

What is the next step after this demographic ranking?

Open the suburb detail pages for the strongest candidates, save realistic matches to your shortlist, and compare them against affordability and local evidence before making a decision.

← Machinery Operators & Drivers

Occupation · ACT · 100 suburbs

Top Suburbs by Machinery Operators & Drivers Workers — ACT

ACT suburbs with the highest number of Machinery Operators & Drivers machinery operators & drivers workers, ranked by count from Census 2021.

Top suburb

KambahACT

Leading count

236

% of population

1.5%

Source

ABS Census 2021

Ranking

Top Suburbs by Machinery Operators & Drivers Workers

ACT suburbs with the highest number of Machinery Operators & Drivers machinery operators & drivers workers, ranked by count from Census 2021. — ACT

100 results

All NSW VIC QLD WA SA TAS ACT NT

How to read this ranking

Use top suburbs by machinery operators & drivers workers to find workforce clusters, not finished shortlists.

BEST FOR

Finding suburbs with a strong concentration of one worker group.

This is useful when you want to see where a profession or worker cohort is clustered in ACT.

READ IT AS

A scale signal, not a suburb score.

Worker counts reflect concentration and population scale. They should be read alongside housing costs, incomes, and access, not in isolation.

NEXT STEP

Validate whether the cluster actually fits your goal.

Move into suburb detail if you need to judge whether the area is investable, livable, or simply large enough to dominate a count-based list.

AVAILABLE evidence

Census concentration signal

This ranking is backed by demographic counts. It is good for finding clusters, not for deciding suburb quality alone.

CLUSTER SCREEN

This ranking finds concentration, not suburb quality.

Use top rows as research leads, then test affordability, services, and evidence depth before shortlisting.

Shortlist flow

Use #1 Kambah and #2 Ngunnawal as the first compare pair.

Rankings are strongest when they hand you a shortlist quickly. Compare the top two first, then open suburb detail if the head-to-head result still feels narrow.

Compare top 2Open #1 detail Open #2 detail

# ▲	SUBURB	STATE	COUNT	% OF POP	POP
1	Kambah	ACT	236	15,670	1.5%
2	Ngunnawal	ACT	204	10,957	1.9%
3	Gordon	ACT	181	7,892	2.3%
4	Banks	ACT	167	5,100	3.3%
5	Gungahlin	ACT	157	8,586	1.8%
6	Belconnen	ACT	141	8,502	1.7%
7	Chisholm	ACT	139	5,268	2.6%
8	Macgregor	ACT	134	7,049	1.9%
9	Wanniassa	ACT	127	7,885	1.6%
10	Franklin	ACT	125	7,484	1.7%
11	Richardson	ACT	124	3,058	4.1%
12	Bonner	ACT	122	7,339	1.7%
13	Dunlop	ACT	120	7,265	1.7%
14	Casey	ACT	113	6,471	1.7%
15	Calwell	ACT	108	5,730	1.9%
16	Conder	ACT	106	5,108	2.1%
17	Isabella Plains	ACT	101	4,329	2.3%
18	Amaroo	ACT	100	6,129	1.6%
19	Nicholls	ACT	100	6,680	1.5%
20	Holt	ACT	99	5,628	1.8%
21	Moncrieff	ACT	96	5,310	1.8%
22	Kaleen	ACT	94	7,672	1.2%
23	Monash	ACT	91	5,644	1.6%
24	Harrison	ACT	90	8,244	1.1%
25	Florey	ACT	89	4,781	1.9%
26	Theodore	ACT	87	3,798	2.3%
27	Evatt	ACT	86	5,531	1.6%
28	Palmerston	ACT	84	5,579	1.5%
29	Charnwood	ACT	76	3,055	2.5%
30	Bruce	ACT	73	7,520	1.0%
31	Greenway	ACT	72	4,129	1.7%
32	Phillip	ACT	70	5,197	1.3%
33	Latham	ACT	67	3,767	1.8%
34	Gilmore	ACT	58	2,706	2.1%
35	Coombs	ACT	57	4,851	1.2%
36	Bonython	ACT	56	3,839	1.5%
37	Lyneham	ACT	56	5,703	1.0%
38	Narrabundah	ACT	56	6,455	0.9%
39	Lawson	ACT	55	2,739	2.0%
40	Taylor	ACT	54	2,220	2.4%
41	Higgins	ACT	53	3,321	1.6%
42	Watson	ACT	53	6,727	0.8%
43	Flynn	ACT	50	3,671	1.4%
44	Wright	ACT	49	3,808	1.3%
45	Scullin	ACT	46	3,069	1.5%
46	Fisher	ACT	43	3,219	1.3%
47	Downer	ACT	42	4,296	1.0%
48	Page	ACT	42	3,054	1.4%
49	Crace	ACT	41	4,800	0.9%
50	Curtin	ACT	41	5,569	0.7%
51	McKellar	ACT	41	2,740	1.5%
52	O'Connor	ACT	40	5,917	0.7%
53	Giralang	ACT	39	3,372	1.2%
54	Lyons	ACT	38	3,271	1.2%
55	Forde	ACT	37	4,435	0.8%
56	Gowrie	ACT	37	3,140	1.2%
57	Melba	ACT	37	3,383	1.1%
58	Kingston	ACT	36	6,579	0.5%
59	Rivett	ACT	35	3,354	1.0%
60	Oxley	ACT	34	1,703	2.0%
61	Braddon	ACT	33	6,383	0.5%
62	Chifley	ACT	32	2,680	1.2%
63	Duffy	ACT	32	3,395	0.9%
64	Fraser	ACT	32	2,126	1.5%
65	Macquarie	ACT	32	3,104	1.0%
66	Weston	ACT	32	4,000	0.8%
67	Mawson	ACT	31	3,440	0.9%
68	Ainslie	ACT	30	5,376	0.6%
69	Denman Prospect	ACT	30	2,759	1.1%
70	Fadden	ACT	29	3,006	1.0%
71	Waramanga	ACT	29	2,785	1.0%
72	Farrer	ACT	28	3,787	0.7%
73	Holder	ACT	28	2,816	1.0%
74	Dickson	ACT	27	3,292	0.8%
75	Griffith	ACT	27	5,328	0.5%
76	Hawker	ACT	27	3,008	0.9%
77	Pearce	ACT	27	2,687	1.0%
78	Garran	ACT	26	3,706	0.7%
79	Symonston	ACT	26	655	4.0%
80	Weetangera	ACT	26	2,795	0.9%
81	Torrens	ACT	25	2,424	1.0%
82	Campbell	ACT	24	6,564	0.4%
83	Spence	ACT	24	2,587	0.9%
84	Throsby	ACT	24	2,405	1.0%
85	Hackett	ACT	22	3,227	0.7%
86	Hughes	ACT	22	3,210	0.7%
87	Stirling	ACT	21	2,191	1.0%
88	Chapman	ACT	20	2,867	0.7%
89	Isaacs	ACT	19	2,379	0.8%
90	Macarthur	ACT	19	1,405	1.4%
91	Turner	ACT	19	4,470	0.4%
92	Red Hill	ACT	18	3,146	0.6%
93	City	ACT	17	4,835	0.4%
94	Acton	ACT	15	2,848	0.5%
95	Cook	ACT	15	2,965	0.5%
96	Strathnairn	ACT	15	714	2.1%
97	Yarralumla	ACT	12	3,120	0.4%
98	Reid	ACT	11	1,544	0.7%
99	Jacka	ACT	10	712	1.4%
100	Deakin	ACT	9	3,124	0.3%

FAQ

Top Suburbs by Machinery Operators & Drivers Workers FAQ

What does this Machinery Operators & Drivers ranking show?

This ranking shows ACT suburbs with the highest Machinery Operators & Drivers worker counts, based on Census 2021 demographic data.
Should I choose a suburb just because it ranks highly here?

No. Demographic rankings explain local context, not investment quality by themselves. Use them with price, rent, income, schools, transport, and detail-page evidence before shortlisting.
Why does QuickProperty show count and percentage of population?

The count shows the size of the local group, while the percentage helps avoid overreading large suburbs that rank highly only because they have more residents overall.
What is the next step after this demographic ranking?

Open the suburb detail pages for the strongest candidates, save realistic matches to your shortlist, and compare them against affordability and local evidence before making a decision.