Austin, TX vs Sacramento, CA
Side-by-side fiscal comparison · U.S. Census Bureau data (2023)
Sacramento, CA outspends Austin, TX by a wide margin per resident — $71,020 versus $21,772, a 226% difference. A gap this size usually reflects a structurally different service mix or accounting scope rather than a single line item.
Austin, TX holds the stronger Fiscal Health Score, 75/100 (grade B) against 57/100 (grade C) for Sacramento, CA — a 18-point spread that puts the two in different grade territory.
Sacramento, CA reports no outstanding debt per resident in its Census filing, while Austin, TX carries $1,229 per resident. Their budgets diverge on where the largest per-resident dollars go: Austin, TX leads with parks and recreation at $1,801 per resident, while Sacramento, CA leads with police at $5,402.
They also fund themselves differently: intergovernmental transfers is the largest single revenue source in Austin, TX at 18% of total revenue, whereas Sacramento, CA relies most on other revenue at 8%.
Summary
Sacramento spends 69.3% more per capita than Austin ($49,248/person difference). Austin, TX has the stronger Fiscal Health Score (B, 75/100).
Fiscal Health Score
Key Metrics
Per Capita Spending by Department
Revenue Breakdown (Per Capita)
| Property Tax | $0 | $1,465 |
| Sales Tax | $526 | $378 |
| Income Tax | $1,465 | $3,104 |
| Intergovernmental | $14,031 | $3,400 |
| Charges & Fees | $3,247 | $3,239 |
| Other | $5,645 | $5,072 |
Spending Breakdown (Per Capita)
| Police | $0 | $5,402 |
| Fire Protection | $634 | $2,466 |
| Education | $51 | $2,684 |
| Public Welfare | $1,837 | $3,470 |
| Health | $517 | $18 |
| Hospitals | $664 | $0 |
| Parks & Recreation | $1,801 | $1,437 |
| Housing | $3,741 | $8,577 |
| Sewerage | $865 | $103 |
| Utilities | $3,264 | $19,920 |
| Interest on Debt | $0 | $162 |
| Other | $8,399 | $26,782 |
Compare More Cities
Source: Census Annual Survey of State and Local Government Finances, 2026.