Chicago, IL vs San Francisco, CA
Side-by-side fiscal comparison · U.S. Census Bureau data (2023)
San Francisco, CA outspends Chicago, IL by a wide margin per resident — $184,131 versus $34,551, a 433% difference. A gap this size usually reflects a structurally different service mix or accounting scope rather than a single line item.
Chicago, IL holds the stronger Fiscal Health Score, 61/100 (grade C) against 48/100 (grade D) for San Francisco, CA — a 13-point spread that puts the two in different grade territory.
On debt, Chicago, IL carries the lighter load at $977 per resident versus $2,031 for San Francisco, CA. Their budgets diverge on where the largest per-resident dollars go: Chicago, IL leads with fire protection at $10,754 per resident, while San Francisco, CA leads with parks and recreation at $4,119.
On the revenue side both lean hardest on intergovernmental transfers — 100% of total revenue in Chicago, IL and 7% in San Francisco, CA.
Summary
San Francisco spends 81.2% more per capita than Chicago ($149,580/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 | $148 |
| Sales Tax | $74 | $3,028 |
| Income Tax | $229 | $269 |
| Intergovernmental | $85,083 | $19,762 |
| Charges & Fees | $2,847 | $7,961 |
| Other | $3,463 | $18,918 |
Spending Breakdown (Per Capita)
| Police | $0 | $3,351 |
| Fire Protection | $10,754 | $2,281 |
| Highways & Roads | $930 | $0 |
| Public Welfare | $1,858 | $2,203 |
| Health | $426 | $1,911 |
| Hospitals | $1,444 | $6,939 |
| Parks & Recreation | $122 | $4,119 |
| Housing | $6,520 | $9,315 |
| Sewerage | $129 | $1,423 |
| Utilities | $2,983 | $21,190 |
| Interest on Debt | $0 | $22,798 |
| General Admin | $0 | $14,899 |
| Other | $9,385 | $93,702 |
Compare More Cities
Source: Census Annual Survey of State and Local Government Finances, 2026.