Naperville, IL vs Chicago, IL
Side-by-side fiscal comparison · U.S. Census Bureau data (2023)
Chicago, IL outspends Naperville, IL by a wide margin per resident — $34,551 versus $15,751, a 119% 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 45/100 (grade D) for Naperville, IL — a 16-point spread that puts the two in different grade territory.
On debt, Chicago, IL carries the lighter load at $977 per resident versus $1,028 for Naperville, IL. Their budgets diverge on where the largest per-resident dollars go: Naperville, IL leads with health at $1,028 per resident, while Chicago, IL leads with fire protection at $10,754.
They also fund themselves differently: charges and fees is the largest single revenue source in Naperville, IL at 68% of total revenue, whereas Chicago, IL relies most on intergovernmental transfers at 100%.
Summary
Chicago spends 54.4% more per capita than Naperville ($18,801/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 | $0 | $26 |
| Sales Tax | $0 | $74 |
| Income Tax | $0 | $229 |
| Intergovernmental | $458 | $85,083 |
| Charges & Fees | $4,765 | $2,847 |
| Other | $2,388 | $3,463 |
Spending Breakdown (Per Capita)
| Fire Protection | $0 | $10,754 |
| Highways & Roads | $0 | $930 |
| Public Welfare | $0 | $1,858 |
| Health | $1,028 | $426 |
| Hospitals | $0 | $1,444 |
| Parks & Recreation | $544 | $122 |
| Housing | $0 | $6,520 |
| Sewerage | $0 | $129 |
| Utilities | $4,527 | $2,983 |
| Other | $9,652 | $9,385 |
Compare More Cities
Source: Census Annual Survey of State and Local Government Finances, 2026.