Chicago, IL vs Fort Worth, TX
Side-by-side fiscal comparison · U.S. Census Bureau data (2023)
Chicago, IL outspends Fort Worth, TX by a wide margin per resident — $34,551 versus $15,939, a 117% difference. A gap this size usually reflects a structurally different service mix or accounting scope rather than a single line item.
Fort Worth, TX edges Chicago, IL on the Fiscal Health Score by 2 points — 63/100 (grade C) to 61/100 (grade C). At a margin this narrow the grade is close enough that the factor-level detail matters more than the composite.
On debt, Chicago, IL carries the lighter load at $977 per resident versus $1,921 for Fort Worth, TX. Their budgets diverge on where the largest per-resident dollars go: Chicago, IL leads with fire protection at $10,754 per resident, while Fort Worth, TX leads with parks and recreation at $708.
On the revenue side both lean hardest on intergovernmental transfers — 100% of total revenue in Chicago, IL and 15% in Fort Worth, TX.
Summary
Chicago spends 116.8% more per capita than Fort Worth ($18,612/person difference). Fort Worth, TX has the stronger Fiscal Health Score (C, 63/100).
Fiscal Health Score
Key Metrics
Per Capita Spending by Department
Revenue Breakdown (Per Capita)
| Property Tax | $26 | $0 |
| Sales Tax | $74 | $198 |
| Income Tax | $229 | $851 |
| Intergovernmental | $85,083 | $4,002 |
| Charges & Fees | $2,847 | $3,594 |
| Other | $3,463 | $3,439 |
Spending Breakdown (Per Capita)
| Fire Protection | $10,754 | $156 |
| Highways & Roads | $930 | $317 |
| Public Welfare | $1,858 | $869 |
| Health | $426 | $235 |
| Hospitals | $1,444 | $1,680 |
| Parks & Recreation | $122 | $708 |
| Housing | $6,520 | $4,217 |
| Sewerage | $129 | $267 |
| Utilities | $2,983 | $2,674 |
| Other | $9,385 | $4,817 |
Compare More Cities
Source: Census Annual Survey of State and Local Government Finances, 2026.