San Francisco, CA vs Chicago, IL
Side-by-side fiscal comparison · U.S. Census Bureau data (2023)
San Francisco, CA outspends Chicago, IL by a wide margin per resident — $184,131 versus $34,551, a 433% 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 48/100 (grade D) for San Francisco, CA — a 13-point spread that puts the two in different grade territory.
On debt, Chicago, IL carries the lighter load at $977 per resident versus $2,031 for San Francisco, CA. Their budgets diverge on where the largest per-resident dollars go: San Francisco, CA leads with parks and recreation at $4,119 per resident, while Chicago, IL leads with fire protection at $10,754.
On the revenue side both lean hardest on intergovernmental transfers — 7% of total revenue in San Francisco, CA and 100% in Chicago, IL.
Summary
San Francisco spends 432.9% more per capita than Chicago ($149,580/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 | $148 | $26 |
| Sales Tax | $3,028 | $74 |
| Income Tax | $269 | $229 |
| Intergovernmental | $19,762 | $85,083 |
| Charges & Fees | $7,961 | $2,847 |
| Other | $18,918 | $3,463 |
Spending Breakdown (Per Capita)
| Police | $3,351 | $0 |
| Fire Protection | $2,281 | $10,754 |
| Highways & Roads | $0 | $930 |
| Public Welfare | $2,203 | $1,858 |
| Health | $1,911 | $426 |
| Hospitals | $6,939 | $1,444 |
| Parks & Recreation | $4,119 | $122 |
| Housing | $9,315 | $6,520 |
| Sewerage | $1,423 | $129 |
| Utilities | $21,190 | $2,983 |
| Interest on Debt | $22,798 | $0 |
| General Admin | $14,899 | $0 |
| Other | $93,702 | $9,385 |
Compare More Cities
Source: Census Annual Survey of State and Local Government Finances, 2026.