Austin, TX vs San Francisco, CA
Side-by-side fiscal comparison · U.S. Census Bureau data (2023)
San Francisco, CA outspends Austin, TX by a wide margin per resident — $184,131 versus $21,772, a 746% 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 48/100 (grade D) for San Francisco, CA — a 27-point spread that puts the two in different grade territory.
On debt, Austin, TX carries the lighter load at $1,229 per resident versus $2,031 for San Francisco, CA. Both cities pour the most per-resident dollars into the same function: parks and recreation leads in Austin, TX at $1,801 per resident and in San Francisco, CA at $4,119.
On the revenue side both lean hardest on intergovernmental transfers — 18% of total revenue in Austin, TX and 7% in San Francisco, CA.
Summary
San Francisco spends 88.2% more per capita than Austin ($162,359/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 | $148 |
| Sales Tax | $526 | $3,028 |
| Income Tax | $1,465 | $269 |
| Intergovernmental | $14,031 | $19,762 |
| Charges & Fees | $3,247 | $7,961 |
| Other | $5,645 | $18,918 |
Spending Breakdown (Per Capita)
| Police | $0 | $3,351 |
| Fire Protection | $634 | $2,281 |
| Education | $51 | $0 |
| Public Welfare | $1,837 | $2,203 |
| Health | $517 | $1,911 |
| Hospitals | $664 | $6,939 |
| Parks & Recreation | $1,801 | $4,119 |
| Housing | $3,741 | $9,315 |
| Sewerage | $865 | $1,423 |
| Utilities | $3,264 | $21,190 |
| Interest on Debt | $0 | $22,798 |
| General Admin | $0 | $14,899 |
| Other | $8,399 | $93,702 |
Compare More Cities
Source: Census Annual Survey of State and Local Government Finances, 2026.