Rugby vs Warwick
Rugby records less crime for its size than Warwick: 72.2 offences per 1,000 residents in the 12 months to June 2026, against 83.8. That is about 16% more. Both figures are averages across a whole local authority, and neither area is uniform: the gap between neighbourhoods inside one of these places is usually wider than the gap between the two of them.
The England and Wales average is 91.2 recorded crimes per 1,000 residents. Rugby is about 21% below it. Warwick is about 8% below it.
Side by side
| Rugby | Warwick | |
|---|---|---|
| Crimes per 1,000 residents | 72.2 | 83.8 |
| Offences in the year to June 2026 | 8,841 | 12,985 |
| Residents | 122,378 | 154,889 |
| Change on the previous 12 months | +6.1% | +14.0% |
| Rank in England and Wales | 214 of 314 | 166 of 314 |
Rank 1 is the highest recorded rate. Both areas are local authority areas, so the two populations are counted the same way and the rates are directly comparable.
Offence by offence
The mix differs more than the totals do. Warwick records about 1.8 times as much shoplifting, 1.7 times as much burglary and 1.7 times as much vehicle crime per resident.
| Offence, per 1,000 residents | Rugby | Warwick |
|---|---|---|
| Violence and sexual offences | 25.6 | 25.4 |
| Anti-social behaviour | 16.0 | 17.4 |
| Shoplifting | 5.1 | 9.2 |
| Criminal damage and arson | 5.5 | 5.0 |
| Public order | 4.7 | 4.9 |
| Vehicle crime | 3.3 | 5.7 |
| Other theft | 4.0 | 4.8 |
| Burglary | 2.4 | 4.1 |
| Other crime | 1.7 | 1.9 |
| Drugs | 1.7 | 1.8 |
| Possession of weapons | 1.1 | 0.9 |
| Bicycle theft | 0.5 | 1.2 |
| Robbery | 0.5 | 0.9 |
| Theft from the person | 0.2 | 0.4 |
| All recorded crime | 72.2 | 83.8 |
Both places since 2011
Each line is a rolling twelve-month rate per 1,000 residents, so seasonality is taken out and the two areas are on the same scale despite their different sizes.
Questions
Is Rugby safer than Warwick?
Rugby records less crime for its size than Warwick: 72.2 offences per 1,000 residents in the 12 months to June 2026, against 83.8. That is about 16% more. Both figures are averages across a whole local authority, and neither area is uniform: the gap between neighbourhoods inside one of these places is usually wider than the gap between the two of them.
What does this comparison not tell you?
Recorded crime counts what the police wrote down, so a place where people report more looks worse than a place where they report less, whatever actually happened. Both figures are averages across a whole local authority: a town with one busy centre and quiet suburbs carries a rate that describes neither. And the denominator is residents, so somewhere that fills up with commuters, students or shoppers by day records crime against a population it is not credited with. How the figures work sets all of this out.
Where else can I compare?
Pick any other two areas, or start from Rugby or Warwick and use the neighbouring areas listed on each. The ranked lists of the safest places and the highest crime rates cover all of them at once.
Figures cover the 12 months to June 2026. Police data is published roughly two months in arrears.