Aurora, IL vs Naperville, IL
Side-by-side fiscal comparison · U.S. Census Bureau data (2023)
Naperville, IL and Aurora, IL spend within 2.9% of each other per resident — $15,751 versus $15,301 — so on the headline spending-per-capita measure the two cities are effectively neck and neck.
Aurora, IL holds the stronger Fiscal Health Score, 87/100 (grade A) against 45/100 (grade D) for Naperville, IL — a 42-point spread that puts the two in different grade territory.
On debt, Aurora, IL carries the lighter load at $489 per resident versus $1,028 for Naperville, IL. Their budgets diverge on where the largest per-resident dollars go: Aurora, IL leads with parks and recreation at $494 per resident, while Naperville, IL leads with health at $1,028.
They also fund themselves differently: intergovernmental transfers is the largest single revenue source in Aurora, IL at 5% of total revenue, whereas Naperville, IL relies most on charges and fees at 68%.
Summary
Naperville spends 2.9% more per capita than Aurora ($450/person difference). Aurora, IL has the stronger Fiscal Health Score (A, 87/100).
Fiscal Health Score
Key Metrics
Per Capita Spending by Department
Revenue Breakdown (Per Capita)
| Sales Tax | $114 | $0 |
| Income Tax | $144 | $0 |
| Intergovernmental | $2,481 | $458 |
| Charges & Fees | $2,224 | $4,765 |
| Other | $1,114 | $2,388 |
Spending Breakdown (Per Capita)
| Fire Protection | $216 | $0 |
| Public Welfare | $922 | $0 |
| Health | $0 | $1,028 |
| Hospitals | $257 | $0 |
| Parks & Recreation | $494 | $544 |
| Housing | $4,836 | $0 |
| Utilities | $2,366 | $4,527 |
| Other | $6,210 | $9,652 |
Compare More Cities
Source: Census Annual Survey of State and Local Government Finances, 2026.