Colorado Springs, CO vs San Francisco, CA
Side-by-side fiscal comparison · U.S. Census Bureau data (2023)
San Francisco, CA outspends Colorado Springs, CO by a wide margin per resident — $184,131 versus $13,222, a 1293% difference. A gap this size usually reflects a structurally different service mix or accounting scope rather than a single line item.
Colorado Springs, CO holds the stronger Fiscal Health Score, 59/100 (grade C) against 48/100 (grade D) for San Francisco, CA — a 11-point spread that puts the two in different grade territory.
On debt, San Francisco, CA carries the lighter load at $2,031 per resident versus $3,063 for Colorado Springs, CO. Their budgets diverge on where the largest per-resident dollars go: Colorado Springs, CO leads with fire protection at $1,266 per resident, while San Francisco, CA leads with parks and recreation at $4,119.
On the revenue side both lean hardest on intergovernmental transfers — 13% of total revenue in Colorado Springs, CO and 7% in San Francisco, CA.
Summary
San Francisco spends 92.8% more per capita than Colorado Springs ($170,909/person difference). Colorado Springs, CO has the stronger Fiscal Health Score (C, 59/100).
Fiscal Health Score
Key Metrics
Per Capita Spending by Department
Revenue Breakdown (Per Capita)
| Property Tax | $0 | $148 |
| Sales Tax | $257 | $3,028 |
| Income Tax | $0 | $269 |
| Intergovernmental | $6,902 | $19,762 |
| Charges & Fees | $5,676 | $7,961 |
| Other | $2,678 | $18,918 |
Spending Breakdown (Per Capita)
| Police | $0 | $3,351 |
| Fire Protection | $1,266 | $2,281 |
| Public Welfare | $575 | $2,203 |
| Health | $0 | $1,911 |
| Hospitals | $416 | $6,939 |
| Parks & Recreation | $376 | $4,119 |
| Housing | $2,713 | $9,315 |
| Sewerage | $0 | $1,423 |
| Utilities | $2,566 | $21,190 |
| Interest on Debt | $190 | $22,798 |
| General Admin | $0 | $14,899 |
| Other | $5,120 | $93,702 |
Compare More Cities
Source: Census Annual Survey of State and Local Government Finances, 2026.