Community-based cardiac rehabilitation (CR) is recommended as a potentially more accessible delivery model for patients, and it could be more cost-effective. No data are available on the nature of community-based CR. This study described the nature of community-based CR in New Zealand (NZ), and compared it with other high-income countries (HICs). Secondary analysis of a global, cross-sectional survey of CR programmes was undertaken. National CR societies or champions facilitated administration of the survey to each programme in their country, via REDCap. Data from NZ CR programmes were compared with the 31 other HICs providing CR (data collected in 28). Responses were received from 27 (62.7%) CR programmes in NZ, and 619 (43.1%) in other HICs. NZ was significantly more likely to offer community-based CR (n = 11, 40.7% vs. other HICs n = 75, 11.6%, p < 0.001). Programmes were primarily overseen by nurses (n = 3, 30.0%) and exercise physiologists (n = 2, 20.0%), serving a median of 40.0% (10.0–70.0%) of total CR programme patients/year. NZ programmes run for a median of 8.0 weeks (Q25–75 = 7.0–12.0), with 10.0 (9.5–13.0) patients/session, attending 12.0 (3.5–12.0) sessions/month. NZ community-based programmes predominantly served moderate (n = 9, 90.0%) and low (n = 4, 40%) cardiac risk patients. NZ CR patients were most often offered community-based programmes based on their choice (n = 10, 70.0%) and distance to main CR centre (n = 4, 40.0%); this did not differ from other HICs (n = 53, 74.6% & n = 33, 46.5%). NZ is a global leader in community-based CR. Availability, quality, safety, efficacy and cost-effectiveness of community-based CR should be considered, in NZ and beyond.