Los Angeles, CA vs Fresno, CA
Side-by-side fiscal comparison · U.S. Census Bureau data (2023)
Los Angeles, CA outspends Fresno, CA by a wide margin per resident — $85,432 versus $43,387, a 97% difference. A gap this size usually reflects a structurally different service mix or accounting scope rather than a single line item.
Fresno, CA edges Los Angeles, CA on the Fiscal Health Score by 3 points — 50/100 (grade C) to 47/100 (grade D). At a margin this narrow the grade is close enough that the factor-level detail matters more than the composite.
Neither city reports outstanding debt per resident in its current Census filing, which removes debt service as a point of difference between them. Their budgets diverge on where the largest per-resident dollars go: Los Angeles, CA leads with police at $4,111 per resident, while Fresno, CA leads with education at $3,942.
On the revenue side both lean hardest on other revenue — 51% of total revenue in Los Angeles, CA and 19% in Fresno, CA.
Summary
Los Angeles spends 96.9% more per capita than Fresno ($42,045/person difference). Fresno, CA has the stronger Fiscal Health Score (C, 50/100).
Fiscal Health Score
Key Metrics
Per Capita Spending by Department
Revenue Breakdown (Per Capita)
| Property Tax | $64 | $337 |
| Sales Tax | $77 | $19 |
| Income Tax | $307 | $501 |
| Intergovernmental | $134 | -$4,470 |
| Charges & Fees | $459 | $11 |
| Other | $9,048 | $2,070 |
Spending Breakdown (Per Capita)
| Police | $4,111 | $3,261 |
| Fire Protection | $1,057 | $568 |
| Highways & Roads | $503 | $0 |
| Education | $829 | $3,942 |
| Public Welfare | $1,286 | $1,946 |
| Health | $409 | $599 |
| Hospitals | $2,135 | $0 |
| Parks & Recreation | $1,347 | $76 |
| Housing | $6,325 | $2,856 |
| Sewerage | $34 | $0 |
| Utilities | $21,992 | $15,340 |
| Interest on Debt | $630 | $255 |
| General Admin | $11,586 | $0 |
| Other | $33,189 | $14,545 |
Compare More Cities
Source: Census Annual Survey of State and Local Government Finances, 2026.