Hammersmith vs Earlsfield
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
Hammersmith
Hammersmith & FulhamEarlsfieldwinner
WandsworthHammersmith is £250/month cheaper on a 1-bed flat.
Lifestyle comparison
Lively
Green space
Nightlife
Café density
Gym density
Walkability
Food scene
Young professionals
Safety
Transport
Hammersmith
Four tube lines, the river, and quick access to Heathrow. Functional more than charming.
- ✓Four tube lines from one station
- ✓Thames Path and riverside pubs
- ✓Quick to Heathrow
- →Town centre feels dated
- →Less character than east-London peers
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 Hammersmith or Earlsfield better to live in?
Earlsfield offers better value — similar or better scores at a lower rent.
Is Hammersmith cheaper than Earlsfield?
Earlsfield is cheaper — average 1-bed rent is £1,600 vs £1,850 in Hammersmith, a saving of £250/month.
Which has better transport — Hammersmith or Earlsfield?
Hammersmith scores higher for transport (9/10 vs 6/10). Hammersmith is served by Hammersmith. Earlsfield is served by Earlsfield.
Compare Hammersmith 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 →