Los Angeles, CA vs Oakland, CA
Side-by-side fiscal comparison · U.S. Census Bureau data (2023)
Los Angeles, CA outspends Oakland, CA by a wide margin per resident — $85,432 versus $30,055, a 184% difference. A gap this size usually reflects a structurally different service mix or accounting scope rather than a single line item.
Oakland, CA holds the stronger Fiscal Health Score, 72/100 (grade B) against 47/100 (grade D) for Los Angeles, CA — a 25-point spread that puts the two in different grade territory.
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 Oakland, CA leads with health at $1,016.
They also fund themselves differently: other revenue is the largest single revenue source in Los Angeles, CA at 51% of total revenue, whereas Oakland, CA relies most on intergovernmental transfers at 100%.
Summary
Los Angeles spends 184.3% more per capita than Oakland ($55,378/person difference). Oakland, CA has the stronger Fiscal Health Score (B, 72/100).
Fiscal Health Score
Key Metrics
Per Capita Spending by Department
Revenue Breakdown (Per Capita)
| Property Tax | $64 | $0 |
| Sales Tax | $77 | $522 |
| Income Tax | $307 | $0 |
| Intergovernmental | $134 | $42,277 |
| Charges & Fees | $459 | $0 |
| Other | $9,048 | $4,337 |
Spending Breakdown (Per Capita)
| Police | $4,111 | $0 |
| Fire Protection | $1,057 | $1 |
| Highways & Roads | $503 | $0 |
| Education | $829 | $0 |
| Public Welfare | $1,286 | $2,426 |
| Health | $409 | $1,016 |
| Hospitals | $2,135 | $2,498 |
| Parks & Recreation | $1,347 | $955 |
| Housing | $6,325 | $7,811 |
| Sewerage | $34 | $1,417 |
| Utilities | $21,992 | $0 |
| Interest on Debt | $630 | $0 |
| General Admin | $11,586 | $0 |
| Other | $33,189 | $13,929 |
Compare More Cities
Source: Census Annual Survey of State and Local Government Finances, 2026.