Wimbledon Common
Neighbourhood · 469 residents
75Very good
Very good · better than 9 in 10 suburbs
Check Local Score out of 100 · 60 is typical for the country
Each arc is a topic, coloured by its score
What’s good
- 72% of residents live within five minutes of a park
- Schools scores 76, well above the typical 60
- Less recorded crime than is typical: 72 per 1,000 people a year against 100
Check before you view
- Prices are high for local incomes: affordability scores 21, where 60 is typical
The essentials
Everyday life
The area
Around Wimbledon Common
Map outline: Approximate — no official boundary exists for this neighbourhood
Is Wimbledon Common a good place to live?
Wimbledon Common scores 75/100 overall, which the scorecard rates as very good — 60 is typical for the country.
It stands out for environment (89) and schools (76).
It scores lowest on affordability (21).
Scores come from official data on safety, schools, transport, prices, health, food & drink and the local environment, for Wimbledon Common in London, each measured against the national average.
Summary of Wimbledon Common
Big houses set back from the road, electric gates half-hidden behind hedging, and an unreasonable amount of sky for somewhere inside the M25 — that's the first impression here, and it doesn't really change as you go deeper in. This is a place built around the Common itself rather than a high street; shopfronts are scarce, front gardens are not.
The practical picture is unusual because so much of it rests on exactly one thing: 350 hectares of common land doing the work that a park, a gym, a dog-walking circuit and a riding school would normally split between them. Population density here is a fraction of the London average, which tells you most of the space is green, not residential — you're sharing it with 893 people rather than a suburb's worth. Schools skew private and well-known rather than plentiful: King's College School and The Study Preparatory sit in the area, both independent, which matters more to the character of the place than any Ofsted table — families who send children here aren't choosing on catchment maps. Transport is the honest weak point; the connectivity grade is solid but transport itself comes in lower, a reminder that living by the Common usually means a drive or a longer walk to the train rather than stepping out onto a platform.
Money is the other defining fact, and it shows up everywhere at once. A median house price north of a million pounds, against a national median under £300k, puts this comfortably among the most expensive corners of the country, and even against Merton — itself one of London's pricier boroughs — property here runs well above the borough norm. The sales sample is thin, but what's there is telling: a dominant tenure of freehold, a mix leaning toward larger or unusual property types rather than flats, and a median sale price well over two million — this is a street where the For Sale board says "whole house," not "share of freehold." Affordability is graded D+, the one mark that properly breaks the pattern of As and Bs elsewhere, and it's not subtle: this is a place that scores among the least deprived in the country (decile 9) and still manages to price out most of the country trying to buy in.