Cricklewood vs Earlsfield
A side-by-side comparison of rent, transport, lifestyle and overall liveability.
Our recommendation
Earlsfield scores higher overall, though Cricklewood may offer better affordability.
Rent comparison
Cricklewoodwinner
BrentEarlsfield
WandsworthEarlsfield is £200/month cheaper on a 1-bed flat.
Lifestyle comparison
Lively
Green space
Nightlife
Café density
Gym density
Walkability
Food scene
Young professionals
Safety
Transport
Cricklewood
A practical north-west option with Thameslink access, lower rents, and improving links around Brent Cross.
- ✓Good value near West Hampstead
- ✓Thameslink access
- ✓Everyday shops and local restaurants
- →Less polished public realm
- →Rail frequency matters more than tube access
- →Limited nightlife
Earlsfield
A quieter Wandsworth option with rail to Waterloo, local pubs, and access to south-west commons.
- ✓Quick rail to Waterloo
- ✓Calmer than Clapham
- ✓Good local pubs and gyms
- →No tube
- →Limited nightlife
- →Can feel expensive for rail-only access
Frequently asked questions
Is Cricklewood or Earlsfield better to live in?
Earlsfield scores higher overall, though Cricklewood may offer better affordability.
Is Cricklewood cheaper than Earlsfield?
Cricklewood is cheaper — average 1-bed rent is £1,400 vs £1,600 in Earlsfield, a saving of £200/month.
Which has better transport — Cricklewood or Earlsfield?
Cricklewood and Earlsfield score equally on transport (6/10). Cricklewood is served by Cricklewood. Earlsfield is served by Earlsfield.
Compare Cricklewood with similar areas
Still deciding? Try the discovery tool
Enter your commute, salary and lifestyle preferences to get a personalised neighbourhood ranking.
Open the discovery tool →