Neighbourhood · 16,799 residents
Fair · among the lowest-scoring suburbs
Check Local Score out of 100 · 60 is typical for the country
Each arc is a topic, coloured by its score
Map outline: Approximate — electoral ward boundary, used as the nearest surveyed shape
Lower Edmonton scores 40/100 overall, which the scorecard rates as fair — 60 is typical for the country.
No topic reaches "very good" (70+); its best is environment (59).
It scores lowest on affordability (34) and transport (39).
Scores come from official data on safety, schools, transport, prices, health, food & drink and the local environment, for Lower Edmonton in London, each measured against the national average.
Terraced Victorian and Edwardian streets dominate here, packed tightly against each other, with the odd parade of shops selling phone cases, halal meat and fried chicken rather than flat whites — this is a working suburb, not a destination one, and it looks like it.
The numbers behind that feel are stark: Lower Edmonton sits in the bottom tenth nationally for both deprivation and income, yet median house prices of £382,250 are still above the national average, if 8% cheaper than the Enfield borough norm around it. That contradiction — modest incomes, prices pulled upward by London itself — shapes everything else. A terraced freehold is what a for-sale board here usually means; three-quarters of sales are freehold houses rather than leasehold flats, which gives the area more of a settled, family-house feel than the flat-heavy blocks you find closer to central London. Rail access runs through Edmonton Green and Silver Street stations, and Galliard Primary carries an Outstanding rating alongside a cluster of solidly Good academies — Houndsfield, Eldon, Churchfield — so a commuting parent has real options for both the school run and the platform. The one grade that jars against this otherwise unremarkable-suburb picture is safety: crime is trending upward, and the rate sits 142% above the Enfield average, with violence and anti-social behaviour making up half of all recorded incidents. That's the fact that deserves weight before anything else on this list.
Green space is genuine if unglamorous — nineteen pockets adding up to nearly 29 hectares, more generous per head than the London average, though don't expect destination parkland. Health provision scores well, one of the stronger marks in the area's profile, and the nightlife grade is respectable too, suggesting a reasonable spread of local pubs and takeaways rather than an evening dead zone. Broadband is patchy rather than uniformly strong, with full-fibre reaching under half of properties, worth checking street by street if you work from home.
This is an area for people already priced into London life who need space and a garden more than polish — a first-time buyer stretching for a terraced house, a family drawn by the Outstanding primary, a commuter trading a longer platform wait for a shorter mortgage. The trade-off is not subtle: you are buying into a below-average-income, high-density suburb with a safety trend moving the wrong way, and that needs to be weighed against the practical case for living here, not glossed over by it.
Data last updated: 19 October 2026
Pick another area to line them up side by side — the verdict, both Check Local Scores, and what actually separates them.