Yes, comfortably. Stockbridge records fewer crimes for its size than the wider district around it, which is the reassuring end of the scale for a rural market town. The recorded crime rate here runs to about 55 offences a year for every thousand people, and that sits roughly 11 percent below the local-authority average. Over the past year the area logged somewhere around 840 recorded crimes across everything from the trivial to the serious. For a place strung out along a river valley with a wide high street and a scatter of villages, that is a quiet ledger.
Worth being clear about what those figures are and are not. The rate is a published measure built on a statistical population base, not a sum you can recreate by dividing the yearly count by the number of residents, so treat the two numbers as separate readings rather than one checking the other. What they agree on is the direction: this is a lower-crime area than the district it belongs to, and it has been over the twelve months covered. There is no single trouble spot the numbers point at, no street worth naming as the problem, and anyone selling you a scary map of a place this small is inventing drama the data does not support. The honest read is a town where most of what gets recorded is low-level and occasional rather than anything that shapes how you live.
That does not mean nothing ever happens, because nowhere hits zero, and a rural area brings its own quieter risks around isolated properties and outbuildings that a town centre does not. It does mean the baseline is genuinely good. The sensible move is the same one that works anywhere: lock the shed, light the drive, and get on with your life rather than worrying about it.
The verdict is that Stockbridge is a safe place to live and the numbers back the reputation rather than puncturing it. Above average on the safety scale, low on drama, and about as gentle as a Hampshire river town tends to be. If personal safety is near the top of your list, this is not the box that will keep you up at night.