Seattle, WA vs San Francisco, CA
Side-by-side fiscal comparison · U.S. Census Bureau data (2023)
San Francisco, CA outspends Seattle, WA by a wide margin per resident — $184,131 versus $34,463, a 434% difference. A gap this size usually reflects a structurally different service mix or accounting scope rather than a single line item.
Seattle, WA 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, Seattle, WA carries the lighter load at $1,100 per resident versus $2,031 for San Francisco, CA. Both cities pour the most per-resident dollars into the same function: parks and recreation leads in Seattle, WA at $3,923 per resident and in San Francisco, CA at $4,119.
On the revenue side both lean hardest on intergovernmental transfers — 13% of total revenue in Seattle, WA and 7% in San Francisco, CA.
Summary
San Francisco spends 81.3% more per capita than Seattle ($149,669/person difference). Seattle, WA 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 | $1,831 | $148 |
| Sales Tax | $1,094 | $3,028 |
| Income Tax | $3,496 | $269 |
| Intergovernmental | $9,846 | $19,762 |
| Charges & Fees | $3,960 | $7,961 |
| Other | $8,544 | $18,918 |
Spending Breakdown (Per Capita)
| Police | $0 | $3,351 |
| Fire Protection | $210 | $2,281 |
| Education | $1,461 | $0 |
| Public Welfare | $3,439 | $2,203 |
| Health | $1,131 | $1,911 |
| Hospitals | $1,871 | $6,939 |
| Parks & Recreation | $3,923 | $4,119 |
| Housing | $3,727 | $9,315 |
| Sewerage | $952 | $1,423 |
| Utilities | $6,489 | $21,190 |
| Interest on Debt | $0 | $22,798 |
| General Admin | $0 | $14,899 |
| Other | $11,260 | $93,702 |
Compare More Cities
Source: Census Annual Survey of State and Local Government Finances, 2026.