Earlsfield vs Richmond
A side-by-side comparison of rent, transport, lifestyle and overall liveability.
Our recommendation
Earlsfield offers better value — similar or better scores at a lower rent.
Rent comparison
Earlsfieldwinner
WandsworthRichmond
Richmond upon ThamesRichmond is £100/month cheaper on a 1-bed flat.
Lifestyle comparison
Lively
Green space
Nightlife
Café density
Gym density
Walkability
Food scene
Young professionals
Safety
Transport
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
Richmond
One of London's greenest town centres, combining the Thames, Richmond Park, and tube/rail connections.
- ✓Richmond Park and riverside access
- ✓District, Overground, and rail options
- ✓Strong cafes, pubs, and shopping
- →Expensive
- →Longer to east London
- →More settled than twenty-something
Frequently asked questions
Is Earlsfield or Richmond better to live in?
Earlsfield offers better value — similar or better scores at a lower rent.
Is Earlsfield cheaper than Richmond?
Earlsfield is cheaper — average 1-bed rent is £1,600 vs £1,700 in Richmond, a saving of £100/month.
Which has better transport — Earlsfield or Richmond?
Richmond scores higher for transport (7/10 vs 6/10). Earlsfield is served by Earlsfield. Richmond is served by Richmond.
Compare Earlsfield 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 →