Fort Worth, TX vs Chicago, IL
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: Fort Worth, TX leads with parks and recreation at $708 per resident, while Chicago, IL leads with fire protection at $10,754.
On the revenue side both lean hardest on intergovernmental transfers — 15% of total revenue in Fort Worth, TX and 100% in Chicago, IL.
Summary
Chicago spends 53.9% 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 | $0 | $26 |
| Sales Tax | $198 | $74 |
| Income Tax | $851 | $229 |
| Intergovernmental | $4,002 | $85,083 |
| Charges & Fees | $3,594 | $2,847 |
| Other | $3,439 | $3,463 |
Spending Breakdown (Per Capita)
| Fire Protection | $156 | $10,754 |
| Highways & Roads | $317 | $930 |
| Public Welfare | $869 | $1,858 |
| Health | $235 | $426 |
| Hospitals | $1,680 | $1,444 |
| Parks & Recreation | $708 | $122 |
| Housing | $4,217 | $6,520 |
| Sewerage | $267 | $129 |
| Utilities | $2,674 | $2,983 |
| Other | $4,817 | $9,385 |
Compare More Cities
Source: Census Annual Survey of State and Local Government Finances, 2026.