Chicago, IL vs Fresno, CA
Side-by-side fiscal comparison · U.S. Census Bureau data (2023)
Fresno, CA spends 26% more per resident than Chicago, IL: $43,387 against $34,551. That gap is large enough to show up across most functional budget categories below.
Chicago, IL holds the stronger Fiscal Health Score, 61/100 (grade C) against 50/100 (grade C) for Fresno, CA — a 11-point spread that puts the two in different grade territory.
Fresno, CA reports no outstanding debt per resident in its Census filing, while Chicago, IL carries $977 per resident. Their budgets diverge on where the largest per-resident dollars go: Chicago, IL leads with fire protection at $10,754 per resident, while Fresno, CA leads with education at $3,942.
They also fund themselves differently: intergovernmental transfers is the largest single revenue source in Chicago, IL at 100% of total revenue, whereas Fresno, CA relies most on other revenue at 19%.
Summary
Fresno spends 20.4% more per capita than Chicago ($8,836/person difference). Chicago, IL has the stronger Fiscal Health Score (C, 61/100).
Fiscal Health Score
Key Metrics
Per Capita Spending by Department
Revenue Breakdown (Per Capita)
| Property Tax | $26 | $337 |
| Sales Tax | $74 | $19 |
| Income Tax | $229 | $501 |
| Intergovernmental | $85,083 | -$4,470 |
| Charges & Fees | $2,847 | $11 |
| Other | $3,463 | $2,070 |
Spending Breakdown (Per Capita)
| Police | $0 | $3,261 |
| Fire Protection | $10,754 | $568 |
| Highways & Roads | $930 | $0 |
| Education | $0 | $3,942 |
| Public Welfare | $1,858 | $1,946 |
| Health | $426 | $599 |
| Hospitals | $1,444 | $0 |
| Parks & Recreation | $122 | $76 |
| Housing | $6,520 | $2,856 |
| Sewerage | $129 | $0 |
| Utilities | $2,983 | $15,340 |
| Interest on Debt | $0 | $255 |
| Other | $9,385 | $14,545 |
Compare More Cities
Source: Census Annual Survey of State and Local Government Finances, 2026.