San Francisco, CA vs Colorado Springs, CO
Side-by-side fiscal comparison · U.S. Census Bureau data (2023)
San Francisco, CA outspends Colorado Springs, CO by a wide margin per resident — $184,131 versus $13,222, a 1293% difference. A gap this size usually reflects a structurally different service mix or accounting scope rather than a single line item.
Colorado Springs, CO holds the stronger Fiscal Health Score, 59/100 (grade C) against 48/100 (grade D) for San Francisco, CA — a 11-point spread that puts the two in different grade territory.
On debt, San Francisco, CA carries the lighter load at $2,031 per resident versus $3,063 for Colorado Springs, CO. 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 Colorado Springs, CO leads with fire protection at $1,266.
On the revenue side both lean hardest on intergovernmental transfers — 7% of total revenue in San Francisco, CA and 13% in Colorado Springs, CO.
Summary
San Francisco spends 1292.6% more per capita than Colorado Springs ($170,909/person difference). Colorado Springs, CO has the stronger Fiscal Health Score (C, 59/100).
Fiscal Health Score
Key Metrics
Per Capita Spending by Department
Revenue Breakdown (Per Capita)
| Property Tax | $148 | $0 |
| Sales Tax | $3,028 | $257 |
| Income Tax | $269 | $0 |
| Intergovernmental | $19,762 | $6,902 |
| Charges & Fees | $7,961 | $5,676 |
| Other | $18,918 | $2,678 |
Spending Breakdown (Per Capita)
| Police | $3,351 | $0 |
| Fire Protection | $2,281 | $1,266 |
| Public Welfare | $2,203 | $575 |
| Health | $1,911 | $0 |
| Hospitals | $6,939 | $416 |
| Parks & Recreation | $4,119 | $376 |
| Housing | $9,315 | $2,713 |
| Sewerage | $1,423 | $0 |
| Utilities | $21,190 | $2,566 |
| Interest on Debt | $22,798 | $190 |
| General Admin | $14,899 | $0 |
| Other | $93,702 | $5,120 |
Compare More Cities
Source: Census Annual Survey of State and Local Government Finances, 2026.