Writer: Lynn Cadet
Editor: Ashley Fricker
Reviewer: Adam West
We deploy a step-by-step methodology to each piece of research we publish to ensure our studies offer complete coverage and meet our rigorous editorial standards.
Key Takeaways
- Financial security in top-ranked cities came not from high salaries, but from economic stability, low taxes, and affordable living costs.
- Affordable housing remained the top differentiator between top and bottom performers, highlighting its impact on Americans’ earnings.
- Sioux Falls, South Dakota, ranks first among midsize cities for its economic stability, affordable housing, and low cost of living.
If you follow any financial advice online, you might hear that a raise or increasing your income is the way to improve your financial standing. But what if income is only part of the equation and not the whole story?
For middle-class earners, how far income stretches after housing, taxes, and everyday expenses can matter even more when building a better financial life. And depending on where you live, those expenses can look dramatically different, impacting how much more you can retain financially.
This study ranks 186 of America’s midsize cities across five financial dimensions to find out where middle-class earnings go the furthest in the U.S., also revealing the factors that impact financial standing the most.
These Cities Proved Affordability Beats a Bigger Paycheck
Our findings reveal that affordability and economic stability can largely outweigh a higher salary when it comes to helping middle-class earners retain more of their income.
The highest-ranked cities, Sioux Falls, South Dakota, Cedar Rapids, Iowa, and Lafayette, Louisiana, prove that affordable housing and below-average living costs can help middle-class earners keep more of what they earn, despite lower income levels.
How We Measured Financial Well-Being
To determine where middle-class earnings go the furthest, we evaluated 186 midsize U.S. cities across these five scoring dimensions:
- Earning Power: This section highlights the per capita personal income and median household income.
- Cost of Living: This section reflects a city’s median gross rent and regional price parity.
- Economic Stability: This section measures a city’s unemployment rate and year-over-year employment change.
- Housing Affordability: This section tracks a city’s rent-to-income ratio and median owner costs as a percentage of its income.
- Tax Burden: This section highlights a city’s effective tax rate and sales tax rate.
Midsize Cities with the Most Spending Power
Together, these factors paint a complete picture of what middle-class families actually experience financially, considering not just what they make, but what they’re left with.
What the Data Reveals
Our data reveals clear patterns among the top and bottom performers for middle-class spending power. Here are the top findings:
- Affordable housing separates top and bottom performers more than any other factor, showing its impact on Americans’ earnings.
- Lower living costs frequently outweigh higher salaries, showing that income is just one factor in achieving better financial standing.
- The highest-ranked cities sit within 2 points of each other and are all located in the Midwest/South, highlighting a sweet spot for middle-class earners.
- Each top-five city scored high in economic stability, reinforcing the role of strong local job markets in helping middle-class households maintain financial stability.
- Bottom-ranked cities show that high taxes and housing costs can erode the benefits of higher paychecks for middle-class earners.
The 5 Cities Where Middle-Class Households Gain the Most Ground
Clustered in the Midwestern and Southern United States, the highest-ranked cities consistently combined affordable housing, below-average living costs, and strong employment conditions. Despite ranking lower on earning power, these cities offer affordable living and economic stability, creating a comfortable environment for their residents to thrive financially.
1. Sioux Falls, SD
Sioux Falls, South Dakota, takes first place on the list. The city performs well across almost every category, offering an economically sound environment for its residents. Despite having a lower earning power score, the city excels in economic stability and regional affordability, thanks to a low rent-to-income ratio (12.36%) and median gross rent of $1,035.
Together, these factors help create a financially strong environment for middle-class residents.
Key Stats:
- Rent-to-Income Ratio: 12.36%
- City Sales Tax Rate (Combined): 4.2%
- Median Gross Rent: $1,035
2. Cedar Rapids, IA
Also located in the Midwest, Cedar Rapids, Iowa, is the runner-up for middle-class spending power. A standout in cost of living, the city has the lowest median gross rent ($967) in the top five and performs exceptionally well in overall affordability.
While it has room to improve its earning power, the city’s economic stability and low cost of living make it an attractive place to live for middle-class families.
Key Stats:
- Rent-to-Income Ratio: 12.65%
- Median Gross Rent: $967
- Effective Tax Rate: 12.8%
3. Lafayette, LA
Lafayette, Louisiana, ranks third for its well-balanced performance across key metrics. Known for its Southern hospitality and rich culture, the city provides great affordability while also offering plenty to do for residents. Lafayette also performs well economically, with a strong 3.87% employment YoY change rate and a low tax burden score (city sales tax: 5%).
Key Stats:
- Employment YoY Change (%): 3.87%
- Rent-to-Income Ratio: 14.44%
- City Sales Tax Rate (Combined): 5%
4. Lincoln, NE
Coming in fourth is another Midwestern gem: Lincoln, Nebraska. The capital of Nebraska, Lincoln, blends big-city amenities with low-cost living and a strong sense of community. Like its Midwestern peers, the city has exceptionally strong economic stability and affordable housing. The city’s low rent-to-income ratio (12.74%), median gross rent ($1086), and city sales tax rate (5.5%) are just a few highlights of its financially stable environment.
Key Stats:
- Rent-to-Income Ratio: 12.74%
- Median Gross Rent: $1,086
- City Sales Tax Rate (Combined): 5.5%
5. Huntsville, AL
Huntsville, Alabama, rounds out the top five rankings. Located in the heart of the South, Huntsville is the largest city in the state but maintains a relatively mid-sized population, giving residents metropolitan living at a lower cost than in larger cities. The city excels in economic stability, posting the highest score in the top five, supported by a rent-to-income ratio of 13.6% and a low city sales tax rate of 4%.
Key Stats:
- Rent-to-Income Ratio: 13.61%
- Median Housing Owner Costs as % of Income: 18.2%
- City Sales Tax Rate (Combined): 4%
| Rank | City | State | Total Score | Earning Power | Per Capita Personal Income | Median Household Income | Cost of Living | Regional Price Parity (Overall) | Median Gross Rent | Economic Stability | Unemployment Rate | Employment YoY Change (%) | Housing Affordability | Rent-to-Income Ratio | Median Owner Costs as % of Income | Tax Burden | Effective Tax Rate | City Sales Tax Rate (Combined) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Sioux Falls | SD | 68.37 | 22.76 | $78,658.00 | $75,970.00 | 81.89 | 90.63 | $1,035.00 | 88.78 | 2.60% | -0.08% | 79.6 | 12.36% | 20.10% | 66.8 | 13.46% | 4.20% |
| 2 | Cedar Rapids | IA | 67.89 | 19.62 | $66,525.00 | $70,424.00 | 85.67 | 88.96 | $967.00 | 84 | 3.70% | 0.46% | 79.69 | 12.65% | 19.50% | 64.87 | 12.80% | 6% |
| 3 | Lafayette | LA | 66.82 | 17.38 | $69,524.00 | $61,915.00 | 86.1 | 87.21 | $1,100.00 | 87.01 | 3.80% | 3.87% | 76.76 | 14.44% | 18.50% | 60.73 | 14.53% | 5% |
| 4 | Lincoln | NE | 66.66 | 20.27 | $68,273.00 | $71,867.00 | 79.52 | 91.58 | $1,086.00 | 88.18 | 3.10% | 1.70% | 79.48 | 12.74% | 19.50% | 64.17 | 13.31% | 5.50% |
| 5 | Huntsville | AL | 66.5 | 21.23 | $69,038.00 | $74,714.00 | 75.71 | 93.07 | $1,171.00 | 90.94 | 2.50% | 1.56% | 79.08 | 13.61% | 18.20% | 67.21 | 13.48% | 4% |
| 6 | Tuscaloosa | AL | 66.48 | 11.47 | $46,696.00 | $51,464.00 | 86.08 | 87.72 | $1,055.00 | 88.03 | 3% | 1.08% | 72.48 | 15.40% | 20.10% | 71.06 | 12.48% | 4% |
| 7 | Topeka | KS | 66.18 | 14.91 | $61,542.00 | $56,956.00 | 85.69 | 88.82 | $979.00 | 80.75 | 4.50% | 1.08% | 79.97 | 12.80% | 19% | 62.56 | 11.23% | 9.35% |
| 8 | Columbia | MO | 65.75 | 17.9 | $62,123.00 | $66,498.00 | 82.67 | 89.44 | $1,097.00 | 85.86 | 3.60% | 1.81% | 79.76 | 13.16% | 18.50% | 56.93 | 13.59% | 7.97% |
| 9 | Green Bay | WI | 65.72 | 18.54 | $68,296.00 | $66,206.00 | 79.84 | 93.09 | $932.00 | 84.26 | 3.30% | -1.18% | 80.85 | 12.64% | 18.60% | 61.66 | 14.19% | – |
| 10 | Montgomery | AL | 65.71 | 14.36 | $57,265.00 | $56,811.00 | 82.43 | 89.68 | $1,089.00 | 84.55 | 3.30% | -0.89% | 74.77 | 14.58% | 19.80% | 69.8 | 12.81% | 4% |
| 11 | Wichita | KS | 65.36 | 17.46 | $63,303.00 | $64,620.00 | 85.56 | 88.95 | $975.00 | 78.45 | 4.70% | -0.22% | 76.76 | 14.06% | 19.20% | 60.51 | 12.97% | 7.50% |
| 12 | Evansville | IN | 65.32 | 13.99 | $62,998.00 | $53,387.00 | 81.53 | 91.53 | $975.00 | 86.7 | 3.10% | 0.26% | 75.87 | 14.22% | 19.60% | 65.89 | 11.88% | 7% |
| 13 | Shreveport | LA | 64.96 | 13.11 | $67,649.00 | $48,699.00 | 91.88 | 84.77 | $987.00 | 81.93 | 4.60% | 2.70% | 68.92 | 16.32% | 21.20% | 57.97 | 15.25% | 5% |
| 14 | Mobile | AL | 64.91 | 12.96 | $53,901.00 | $53,558.00 | 85.27 | 88.10 | $1,068.00 | 81.3 | 3.80% | -1.70% | 70.05 | 15.95% | 21% | 70.2 | 12.70% | 4% |
| 15 | Tulsa | OK | 64.79 | 18.44 | $83,844.00 | $59,838.00 | 83.8 | 89.21 | $1,052.00 | 81.75 | 4.20% | 0.64% | 70.91 | 16.17% | 19.90% | 63.41 | 14.16% | 4.50% |
| 16 | Des Moines | IA | 64.39 | 18.64 | $69,800.00 | $65,932.00 | 79.26 | 91.70 | $1,090.00 | 83.89 | 3.90% | 1.30% | 76.45 | 13.81% | 19.90% | 60.1 | 14.05% | 6% |
| 17 | Omaha | NE | 64.28 | 22.77 | $85,842.00 | $73,201.00 | 77.25 | 91.91 | $1,187.00 | 86.63 | 3.60% | 2.56% | 74.98 | 14.44% | 19.90% | 57.06 | 15.17% | 5.50% |
| 18 | Columbus | GA | 64.16 | 14.54 | $55,517.00 | $58,073.00 | 82.74 | 89.30 | $1,106.00 | 78.61 | 4.70% | -0.06% | 68.58 | 16.46% | 21.20% | 72.84 | 12.01% | 4% |
| 19 | Fort Wayne | IN | 64.15 | 16.42 | $62,717.00 | $61,422.00 | 79.48 | 92.57 | $999.00 | 84.79 | 3.90% | 2.18% | 75.94 | 14.84% | 18.40% | 60.79 | 13.22% | 7% |
| 20 | Independence | MO | 63.85 | 15.78 | $60,129.00 | $60,339.00 | 77.61 | 92.54 | $1,109.00 | 82.66 | 4.30% | 1.99% | 72.89 | 14.63% | 21.20% | 69.54 | 12.82% | – |
| 21 | Wichita Falls | TX | 63.76 | 15.46 | $57,855.00 | $60,177.00 | 83.86 | 89.51 | $1,022.00 | 79.46 | 4.20% | -1.60% | 72.39 | 15.16% | 20.60% | 60.74 | 12.42% | 8.25% |
| 22 | Springfield | IL | 63.63 | 17.94 | $63,581.00 | $66,064.00 | 79.63 | 92.75 | $975.00 | 70.36 | 5.20% | -5.75% | 80.85 | 12.59% | 18.70% | 62.84 | 13.17% | 6.25% |
| 23 | Little Rock | AR | 63.2 | 17.5 | $67,740.00 | $63,003.00 | 82.63 | 89.36 | $1,106.00 | 77.23 | 5.10% | 0.48% | 75.04 | 14.85% | 19.10% | 55.47 | 14.93% | 6.50% |
| 24 | Amarillo | TX | 63.15 | 17.37 | $59,196.00 | $65,912.00 | 79.04 | 91.82 | $1,092.00 | 82.78 | 3.70% | -0.73% | 76.93 | 13.34% | 20.40% | 54.43 | 14.07% | 8.25% |
| 25 | Peoria | IL | 62.99 | 16.04 | $64,705.00 | $59,410.00 | 81.47 | 91.23 | $1,005.00 | 68.31 | 6.40% | -2.07% | 79.14 | 12.77% | 19.70% | 61.77 | 13.45% | 6.25% |
| 26 | Augusta | GA | 62.94 | 12.75 | $47,141.00 | $55,485.00 | 78.04 | 91.90 | $1,142.00 | 78.34 | 5.30% | 2.51% | 67.38 | 17.14% | 20.90% | 78.35 | 10.57% | 4% |
| 27 | Lexington | KY | 62.91 | 19.64 | $69,065.00 | $69,479.00 | 76.12 | 92.89 | $1,164.00 | 84.9 | 3.50% | 0.39% | 75.53 | 14.91% | 18.60% | 55.35 | 15.29% | 6% |
| 28 | Kansas City | KS | 62.82 | 14.36 | $42,878.00 | $62,401.00 | 77.37 | 92.54 | $1,123.00 | 78.17 | 5.30% | 2.34% | 71.62 | 14.63% | 22.20% | 71.26 | 9.10% | 9.13% |
| 29 | Baton Rouge | LA | 62.7 | 13.88 | $70,775.00 | $49,994.00 | 81.1 | 90.78 | $1,067.00 | 83.7 | 4.30% | 3% | 72.02 | 15.76% | 19.80% | 57.59 | 15.35% | 5% |
| 30 | Toledo | OH | 62.5 | 12.55 | $60,288.00 | $49,724.00 | 82.93 | 91.46 | $901.00 | 68.31 | 6.20% | -3.02% | 78.18 | 13.56% | 19% | 61.53 | 12.54% | 7.75% |
| 31 | Laredo | TX | 62.41 | 14.98 | $44,200.00 | $63,915.00 | 87.71 | 86.96 | $1,030.00 | 78.83 | 4.80% | 0.63% | 57.16 | 19.82% | 24% | 65.6 | 11.15% | 8.25% |
| 32 | Birmingham | AL | 62.38 | 13.21 | $75,312.00 | $46,051.00 | 79.05 | 91.64 | $1,107.00 | 87.59 | 3% | 0.65% | 69.41 | 15.84% | 21.70% | 60.03 | 15.36% | 4% |
| 33 | Syracuse | NY | 62.37 | 12.77 | $67,066.00 | $47,819.00 | 73.84 | 95.74 | $1,039.00 | 85.17 | 4% | 3.02% | 72.73 | 16.05% | 18.70% | 68.94 | 13.03% | 4% |
| 34 | South Bend | IN | 62.29 | 14.25 | $59,030.00 | $55,786.00 | 78.44 | 92.86 | $1,033.00 | 85.23 | 3.40% | 0.25% | 68.92 | 17.62% | 18.80% | 62.28 | 12.83% | 7% |
| 35 | Clarksville | TN | 62.26 | 17.83 | $54,347.00 | $69,303.00 | 76.66 | 90.95 | $1,307.00 | 85.38 | 3.90% | 2.76% | 65.64 | 17.99% | 20.70% | 65.03 | 10.48% | 9.50% |
| 36 | Mcallen | TX | 62.26 | 13.21 | $35,290.00 | $61,579.00 | 89.04 | 85.90 | $1,049.00 | 69.24 | 6.90% | 1.21% | 60.57 | 20.09% | 20.80% | 69.35 | 10.17% | 8.25% |
| 37 | Dayton | OH | 62.24 | 11.24 | $60,796.00 | $45,247.00 | 80.7 | 92.69 | $918.00 | 77.81 | 4.90% | 0.10% | 71.79 | 16.29% | 19% | 65.01 | 11.79% | 7.50% |
| 38 | Brownsville | TX | 61.99 | 10.87 | $39,990.00 | $52,130.00 | 91.11 | 85.98 | $923.00 | 63.53 | 7.20% | -2.95% | 61.74 | 18.89% | 22.10% | 70.73 | 9.81% | 8.25% |
| 39 | Abilene | TX | 61.94 | 16.67 | $61,692.00 | $62,648.00 | 80.18 | 90.36 | $1,157.00 | 85.45 | 3.60% | 1.40% | 64.66 | 17.54% | 22.30% | 58.64 | 12.97% | 8.25% |
| 40 | Overland Park | KS | 61.92 | 33.59 | $95,419.00 | $104,834.00 | 70.56 | 92.54 | $1,515.00 | 84.03 | 3.90% | 1.44% | 76.44 | 14.63% | 18.40% | 40.95 | 16.88% | 9.35% |
| 41 | Jackson | MS | 61.9 | 9.51 | $54,448.00 | $42,071.00 | 84.01 | 89.05 | $1,055.00 | 80.2 | 3.80% | -2.77% | 66.13 | 17.35% | 21.50% | 63.6 | 12.48% | 7% |
| 42 | Buffalo | NY | 61.88 | 13.18 | $64,801.00 | $50,041.00 | 73.55 | 95.84 | $1,046.00 | 81.31 | 4.60% | 2.09% | 73.45 | 15.96% | 18.30% | 68.62 | 13.12% | 4% |
| 43 | Murfreesboro | TN | 61.82 | 21.61 | $58,345.00 | $80,108.00 | 65.22 | 96.34 | $1,481.00 | 90.14 | 2.90% | 2.67% | 67.32 | 18.08% | 19.20% | 72.95 | 12.22% | – |
| 44 | Akron | OH | 61.78 | 12.93 | $67,711.00 | $48,076.00 | 79 | 93.37 | $955.00 | 76.78 | 4.90% | -0.90% | 74.53 | 15.17% | 18.90% | 60.48 | 13.46% | 6.75% |
| 45 | Metairie | LA | 61.59 | 20.33 | $65,691.00 | $73,042.00 | 76.38 | 92.60 | $1,175.00 | 82.36 | 4.20% | 1.23% | 64.47 | 17.79% | 22% | 62.41 | 14.09% | 5% |
| 46 | Pueblo | CO | 61.56 | 13.63 | $51,492.00 | $56,664.00 | 79.3 | 91.76 | $1,082.00 | 67.95 | 6.30% | -2.90% | 62.65 | 18.13% | 22.80% | 82.13 | 10.30% | 2.90% |
| 47 | Rockford | IL | 61.48 | 13.48 | $55,188.00 | $54,752.00 | 80.38 | 92.15 | $985.00 | 66.07 | 6.60% | -3.31% | 70.82 | 16.32% | 19.70% | 70.66 | 11.12% | 6.25% |
| 48 | Pittsburgh | PA | 61.42 | 19.52 | $77,685.00 | $65,742.00 | 71.65 | 94.67 | $1,261.00 | 83.13 | 4% | 1.04% | 78.07 | 14.53% | 17.30% | 52.93 | 15.27% | 7% |
| 49 | Killeen | TX | 61.41 | 15.39 | $55,214.00 | $60,977.00 | 78.1 | 91.13 | $1,208.00 | 77.79 | 5% | 0.56% | 65.5 | 16.64% | 23.30% | 67.57 | 10.63% | 8.25% |
| 50 | Waco | TX | 61.4 | 13.56 | $56,851.00 | $54,365.00 | 76.63 | 92.55 | $1,165.00 | 79.36 | 4.20% | -1.70% | 66.35 | 16.61% | 22.70% | 70.18 | 12.71% | – |
| 51 | Athens-Clarke County | GA | 61.39 | 11.93 | $46,732.00 | $52,974.00 | 74.45 | 93.34 | $1,219.00 | 87.04 | 3.30% | 1.54% | 68.49 | 16.94% | 20.40% | 66.07 | 13.78% | 4% |
| 52 | Winston-Salem | NC | 61.24 | 15.91 | $63,989.00 | $59,268.00 | 78.78 | 92.04 | $1,087.00 | 78.52 | 4.30% | -2.04% | 69.1 | 17.05% | 19.70% | 58.87 | 13.72% | 7% |
| 53 | St. Louis | MO | 61.19 | 15.27 | $66,606.00 | $56,160.00 | 75.59 | 95.09 | $997.00 | 76.41 | 4.90% | -1.26% | 79.34 | 13.12% | 18.90% | 54.23 | 13.19% | 9.68% |
| 54 | Lansing | MI | 60.93 | 13.24 | $54,120.00 | $54,382.00 | 75.81 | 94.99 | $993.00 | 72.98 | 5.10% | -3.67% | 73.63 | 14.96% | 20% | 65.81 | 12.55% | 6% |
| 55 | Cary | NC | 60.92 | 41.62 | $85,573.00 | $134,905.00 | 57.91 | 98.16 | $1,738.00 | 85.22 | 3.50% | 0.70% | 75.02 | 15.83% | 17.30% | 49.55 | 15.99% | 7.25% |
| 56 | Chattanooga | TN | 60.72 | 18.12 | $69,042.00 | $64,523.00 | 76.74 | 91.46 | $1,256.00 | 86.69 | 3.40% | 1.67% | 69.06 | 17.45% | 19% | 48.35 | 15.01% | 9.25% |
| 57 | Provo | UT | 60.62 | 16.89 | $59,651.00 | $64,171.00 | 67.27 | 98.23 | $1,193.00 | 80.99 | 4% | -1.05% | 72.58 | 14.76% | 21.20% | 69.31 | 12.86% | – |
| 58 | Cleveland | OH | 60.61 | 11.3 | $72,797.00 | $40,801.00 | 78.31 | 93.92 | $945.00 | 85.49 | 3.80% | 2.39% | 71.24 | 15.44% | 21% | 51.93 | 14.89% | 8% |
| 59 | High Point | NC | 60.59 | 17.49 | $63,665.00 | $64,561.00 | 76.99 | 92.87 | $1,116.00 | 78.83 | 4.70% | 0.15% | 63.72 | 18.64% | 21% | 62.85 | 13.99% | – |
| 60 | Lubbock | TX | 60.58 | 15.43 | $55,804.00 | $60,895.00 | 78.26 | 91.32 | $1,182.00 | 83.83 | 3.70% | 0.30% | 65.35 | 17.63% | 21.60% | 55.83 | 13.70% | 8.25% |
| 61 | College Station | TX | 60.47 | 12.04 | $52,970.00 | $50,900.00 | 78.62 | 90.95 | $1,194.00 | 83.59 | 3.70% | 0.07% | 68.59 | 16.08% | 21.90% | 54.76 | 13.98% | 8.25% |
| 62 | Beaumont | TX | 60.29 | 13.92 | $53,111.00 | $56,997.00 | 81.31 | 90.05 | $1,121.00 | 69.1 | 6.50% | -0.83% | 69.53 | 15.68% | 21.90% | 58.93 | 12.89% | 8.25% |
| 63 | Tyler | TX | 60.24 | 19.13 | $69,908.00 | $67,486.00 | 75.73 | 92.16 | $1,252.00 | 82.6 | 4.20% | 1.46% | 68.48 | 17.26% | 19.80% | 50.72 | 15.04% | 8.25% |
| 64 | Cincinnati | OH | 60.14 | 15.74 | $78,987.00 | $52,909.00 | 75.08 | 95.37 | $1,001.00 | 80.82 | 4.30% | 0.20% | 75.42 | 14.52% | 19.40% | 48.38 | 15.94% | 7.80% |
| 65 | Rochester | NY | 59.98 | 12.6 | $67,184.00 | $47,213.00 | 71.09 | 97.04 | $1,081.00 | 83.37 | 4.20% | 2.22% | 66.49 | 18.17% | 19.70% | 68.87 | 13.05% | 4% |
| 66 | Columbia | SC | 59.98 | 14.36 | $60,580.00 | $55,529.00 | 74.22 | 93.66 | $1,204.00 | 77.78 | 5.50% | 2.91% | 71.5 | 16.52% | 18.80% | 59.17 | 12.99% | 8% |
| 67 | Fayetteville | NC | 59.89 | 14.27 | $52,382.00 | $58,407.00 | 76.05 | 91.98 | $1,250.00 | 73.78 | 5.10% | -2.89% | 61.74 | 19% | 21.90% | 72.03 | 10.28% | 7% |
| 68 | Greensboro | NC | 59.86 | 16.56 | $63,665.00 | $61,515.00 | 76.02 | 92.87 | $1,172.00 | 78.83 | 4.70% | 0.15% | 65.75 | 18.64% | 19.40% | 58.47 | 13.99% | 6.75% |
| 69 | Knoxville | TN | 59.75 | 15.36 | $72,840.00 | $54,039.00 | 76.15 | 92.57 | $1,191.00 | 90.44 | 2.90% | 2.96% | 67.37 | 17.36% | 20.50% | 45.32 | 15.80% | 9.25% |
| 70 | Grand Rapids | MI | 59.74 | 20.05 | $73,492.00 | $69,108.00 | 70.2 | 95.55 | $1,266.00 | 76.35 | 4.40% | -3.69% | 70.63 | 17.27% | 18.10% | 60.63 | 13.91% | 6% |
| 71 | Anchorage | AK | 58.85 | 31.8 | $84,370.00 | $103,284.00 | 50.9 | 105.42 | $1,489.00 | 80.26 | 4.50% | 0.60% | 71.11 | 15.17% | 21.60% | 73.08 | 14.55% | 0% |
| 72 | Odessa | TX | 58.79 | 20.06 | $62,325.00 | $73,472.00 | 71.92 | 93.90 | $1,315.00 | 81.94 | 4.10% | 0.34% | 57.19 | 21.10% | 21.60% | 63.14 | 11.79% | 8.25% |
| 73 | Durham | NC | 58.66 | 23.35 | $69,077.00 | $81,619.00 | 62.82 | 97.57 | $1,508.00 | 82.97 | 3.70% | -0.54% | 72.21 | 16.27% | 18.70% | 55.03 | 14.40% | 7.50% |
| 74 | Chesapeake | VA | 58.6 | 27.17 | $65,771.00 | $95,373.00 | 60.89 | 97.94 | $1,586.00 | 82.06 | 3.70% | -1.43% | 60.66 | 19.30% | 22.20% | 69.71 | 11.53% | 6% |
| 75 | Savannah | GA | 58.46 | 15.14 | $62,976.00 | $57,137.00 | 68.71 | 95.21 | $1,382.00 | 90.3 | 3.10% | 3.77% | 58.58 | 20.24% | 22.10% | 63.71 | 14.40% | 4% |
| 76 | Madison | WI | 58.42 | 23.7 | $81,203.00 | $78,050.00 | 64.92 | 97.29 | $1,413.00 | 86.68 | 2.80% | -1.18% | 71.61 | 15.66% | 20.30% | 45.89 | 14.84% | 10.50% |
| 77 | Raleigh | NC | 58.37 | 26.47 | $85,573.00 | $85,395.00 | 60.8 | 98.16 | $1,572.00 | 85.22 | 3.50% | 0.70% | 73.12 | 15.83% | 18.80% | 49.55 | 15.99% | 7.25% |
| 78 | Newport News | VA | 58.34 | 17.81 | $53,320.00 | $69,634.00 | 65.19 | 97.94 | $1,339.00 | 77.31 | 4.60% | -1.81% | 61.67 | 19.30% | 21.40% | 75.26 | 10.08% | 6% |
| 79 | Corpus Christi | TX | 58.31 | 17.69 | $58,091.00 | $67,394.00 | 74.23 | 92.67 | $1,292.00 | 79.55 | 4.70% | 0.85% | 58.55 | 19.82% | 22.90% | 59.07 | 12.85% | 8.25% |
| 80 | Boise | ID | 57.98 | 24.98 | $76,921.00 | $83,904.00 | 62.62 | 98.39 | $1,446.00 | 83.32 | 3.80% | 0.27% | 66.16 | 18.25% | 19.80% | 56.47 | 15% | 6% |
| 81 | Hampton | VA | 57.83 | 17.99 | $54,848.00 | $69,621.00 | 63.66 | 97.94 | $1,427.00 | 76.27 | 4.90% | -1.40% | 60.4 | 19.30% | 22.40% | 77.42 | 9.52% | 6% |
| 82 | Tallahassee | FL | 57.73 | 15.09 | $61,912.00 | $57,409.00 | 72.27 | 93.92 | $1,293.00 | 74.48 | 5% | -2.68% | 65.97 | 17.58% | 21.20% | 57.74 | 13.69% | 7.50% |
| 83 | New Orleans | LA | 57.45 | 16 | $71,513.00 | $56,631.00 | 75.06 | 92.60 | $1,251.00 | 76.73 | 5% | -0.48% | 60.03 | 17.79% | 25.50% | 54.75 | 16.09% | 5% |
| 84 | Fort Collins | CO | 57.1 | 24.98 | $73,894.00 | $85,070.00 | 54.11 | 101.13 | $1,690.00 | 79.42 | 4.10% | -2.11% | 70.01 | 16.29% | 20.40% | 66.35 | 14.42% | 2.90% |
| 85 | Wilmington | NC | 56.99 | 18.87 | $69,666.00 | $66,738.00 | 66.58 | 96.42 | $1,395.00 | 84.15 | 3.70% | 0.61% | 65.09 | 17.95% | 21.20% | 50.68 | 16.11% | – |
| 86 | Norfolk | VA | 56.84 | 16.52 | $51,498.00 | $66,109.00 | 65.5 | 97.94 | $1,321.00 | 76.97 | 4.70% | -1.66% | 60.15 | 19.30% | 22.60% | 68.74 | 11.79% | 6% |
| 87 | Colorado Springs | CO | 56.6 | 24.31 | $68,934.00 | $84,818.00 | 55.49 | 100.71 | $1,648.00 | 77.11 | 4.50% | -2.48% | 62.52 | 18.51% | 22.20% | 73.48 | 12.56% | 2.90% |
| 88 | Virginia Beach | VA | 56.49 | 27.69 | $76,347.00 | $92,968.00 | 58.67 | 97.94 | $1,714.00 | 82.86 | 3.50% | -1.60% | 60.15 | 19.30% | 22.60% | 59.26 | 14.27% | 6% |
| 89 | Midland | TX | 56.37 | 34.98 | $146,414.00 | $89,585.00 | 66.9 | 95.78 | $1,434.00 | 86.47 | 3.30% | 0.99% | 64.61 | 18.10% | 21.30% | 22.75 | 22.36% | 8.25% |
| 90 | Salt Lake City | UT | 56.2 | 22.11 | $75,434.00 | $75,090.00 | 59.31 | 100.87 | $1,414.00 | 80.98 | 3.90% | -1.53% | 68.9 | 17.09% | 19.80% | 53.7 | 14.13% | 8.45% |
| 91 | Salem | OR | 56.19 | 20.41 | $60,135.00 | $75,487.00 | 55.21 | 103.65 | $1,400.00 | 74.81 | 5.70% | 0.96% | 58.13 | 20.22% | 22.50% | 84.61 | 11.53% | 0% |
| 92 | Richmond | VA | 56.15 | 19.44 | $80,007.00 | $64,587.00 | 64.74 | 97.86 | $1,372.00 | 79.45 | 4.20% | -1.61% | 65.78 | 17.50% | 21.50% | 51.78 | 16.22% | 6% |
| 93 | Joliet | IL | 55.86 | 26.75 | $70,456.00 | $92,201.00 | 57.45 | 103.60 | $1,276.00 | 73.64 | 5.40% | -1.60% | 65.39 | 17.82% | 21.20% | 61.02 | 13.64% | 6.25% |
| 94 | Spokane | WA | 55.76 | 18.95 | $61,810.00 | $70,064.00 | 63.59 | 100.35 | $1,215.00 | 77.93 | 5.10% | 1.16% | 63.69 | 18.23% | 21.80% | 56.46 | 12.99% | 9.10% |
| 95 | Ann Arbor | MI | 55.47 | 24.8 | $79,736.00 | $82,212.00 | 55.21 | 100.88 | $1,649.00 | 75.89 | 4.30% | -4.61% | 72.71 | 15.78% | 19.20% | 53.45 | 15.79% | 6% |
| 96 | Gainesville | FL | 55.44 | 11.3 | $58,873.00 | $46,195.00 | 67.82 | 96.73 | $1,296.00 | 72.7 | 5.50% | -2.05% | 66.67 | 16.79% | 22.10% | 57.32 | 13.80% | 7.50% |
| 97 | Allentown | PA | 55.19 | 15.1 | $66,913.00 | $55,494.00 | 62.4 | 99.97 | $1,317.00 | 81.93 | 4.60% | 2.70% | 58.26 | 19.57% | 23.60% | 63.42 | 13.18% | 6% |
| 98 | Springfield | MA | 54.84 | 14.15 | $66,238.00 | $52,656.00 | 71.51 | 96.06 | $1,144.00 | 69.14 | 6.30% | -1.74% | 50.63 | 21.63% | 25.80% | 67.06 | 12.06% | 6.25% |
| 99 | Frisco | TX | 54.66 | 46.77 | $89,488.00 | $150,212.00 | 45.41 | 103.09 | $2,014.00 | 83.14 | 4.20% | 1.99% | 62.13 | 19.75% | 20.20% | 45.25 | 16.47% | 8.25% |
| 100 | Eugene | OR | 54.37 | 18.26 | $65,010.00 | $66,562.00 | 58.43 | 101.57 | $1,402.00 | 71.79 | 5.80% | -1.51% | 53.36 | 22.09% | 22.80% | 78.32 | 13.18% | 0% |
| 101 | St. Paul | MN | 54.35 | 21.16 | $71,769.00 | $73,394.00 | 55.45 | 104.82 | $1,281.00 | 76.8 | 4.70% | -1.83% | 71.5 | 15.49% | 20.70% | 51.08 | 13.89% | 9.88% |
| 102 | Atlanta | GA | 54.25 | 29.6 | $111,238.00 | $85,652.00 | 55.41 | 100.06 | $1,711.00 | 82.69 | 3.80% | -0.34% | 64.75 | 19.12% | 19.30% | 42.37 | 19.98% | 4% |
| 103 | Minneapolis | MN | 54.05 | 26.83 | $100,352.00 | $80,846.00 | 53.88 | 104.82 | $1,371.00 | 78.24 | 4.40% | -1.85% | 72.77 | 15.49% | 19.70% | 41.54 | 16.94% | 9.03% |
| 104 | Providence | RI | 54 | 18.27 | $61,040.00 | $68,119.00 | 58 | 101.77 | $1,408.00 | 74.15 | 5.80% | 0.78% | 61.58 | 18.15% | 23.60% | 63.36 | 12.54% | 7% |
| 105 | New Bedford | MA | 53.82 | 15.81 | $69,073.00 | $56,981.00 | 62.71 | 101.77 | $1,137.00 | 70.6 | 6.20% | -0.79% | 59.04 | 18.15% | 25.60% | 62.96 | 13.13% | 6.25% |
| 106 | McKinney | TX | 53.56 | 38.81 | $89,488.00 | $124,215.00 | 47.37 | 103.09 | $1,901.00 | 83.14 | 4.20% | 1.99% | 61.62 | 19.75% | 20.60% | 45.25 | 16.47% | 8.25% |
| 107 | Aurora | IL | 53.36 | 27.13 | $69,927.00 | $93,633.00 | 51.89 | 103.60 | $1,596.00 | 68.94 | 6.30% | -1.93% | 65.01 | 17.82% | 21.50% | 60.14 | 13.87% | 6.25% |
| 108 | Plano | TX | 53.11 | 35.15 | $89,488.00 | $112,253.00 | 48.42 | 103.09 | $1,841.00 | 83.14 | 4.20% | 1.99% | 61.5 | 19.75% | 20.70% | 45.25 | 16.47% | 8.25% |
| 109 | Chandler | AZ | 52.82 | 31.82 | $72,176.00 | $108,095.00 | 47 | 103.32 | $1,902.00 | 79.46 | 4.30% | -1.13% | 63.39 | 20.14% | 18.50% | 51.74 | 15.06% | 7.80% |
| 110 | Charleston | SC | 52.72 | 29.21 | $90,550.00 | $92,414.00 | 53.81 | 100.96 | $1,722.00 | 82.78 | 4.40% | 2.58% | 63.87 | 19.34% | 19.60% | 36.95 | 18.15% | 9% |
| 111 | Reno | NV | 52.67 | 25.18 | $86,639.00 | $80,760.00 | 56.61 | 101.01 | $1,556.00 | 80.11 | 4.60% | 0.92% | 60.5 | 20.07% | 20.90% | 43.53 | 16.91% | 8.27% |
| 112 | Arlington | TX | 52.58 | 21.48 | $69,936.00 | $75,171.00 | 54.87 | 103.09 | $1,470.00 | 80.57 | 4.20% | -0.51% | 60.61 | 19.38% | 22.10% | 50.77 | 15.03% | 8.25% |
| 113 | Gilbert | AZ | 52.51 | 36.25 | $72,176.00 | $122,551.00 | 43.39 | 103.32 | $2,110.00 | 79.46 | 4.30% | -1.13% | 63.77 | 20.14% | 18.20% | 50.5 | 15.06% | 8.30% |
| 114 | Aurora | CO | 52.46 | 27.21 | $84,131.00 | $88,368.00 | 44.32 | 105.78 | $1,835.00 | 80.93 | 4.10% | -0.64% | 62.82 | 17.89% | 23.10% | 60.14 | 16.05% | 2.90% |
| 115 | Worcester | MA | 52.34 | 20.16 | $71,909.00 | $70,102.00 | 55.46 | 102.52 | $1,487.00 | 75.32 | 5.30% | -0.43% | 57.43 | 20.19% | 23.10% | 59.25 | 14.11% | 6.25% |
| 116 | Peoria | AZ | 52.02 | 28.06 | $72,176.00 | $95,815.00 | 48.03 | 103.32 | $1,843.00 | 79.46 | 4.30% | -1.13% | 62.12 | 20.14% | 19.50% | 51 | 15.06% | 8.10% |
| 117 | Scottsdale | AZ | 51.78 | 32.68 | $72,176.00 | $110,886.00 | 45.07 | 103.32 | $2,013.00 | 79.46 | 4.30% | -1.13% | 60.6 | 20.14% | 20.70% | 51.25 | 15.06% | 8% |
| 118 | Tempe | AZ | 51.78 | 23.12 | $72,176.00 | $79,663.00 | 49.77 | 103.32 | $1,743.00 | 79.46 | 4.30% | -1.13% | 63.26 | 20.14% | 18.60% | 51 | 15.06% | 8.10% |
| 119 | Glendale | AZ | 51.76 | 21.25 | $72,176.00 | $73,530.00 | 53.51 | 103.32 | $1,528.00 | 79.46 | 4.30% | -1.13% | 61.49 | 20.14% | 20% | 48.27 | 15.06% | 9.20% |
| 120 | Arlington | VA | 51.72 | 49.3 | $131,624.00 | $142,114.00 | 31.01 | 108.88 | $2,322.00 | 82.18 | 3.40% | -2.73% | 70.66 | 16.44% | 19.60% | 40.64 | 19.59% | 5.30% |
| 121 | Boulder | CO | 51.51 | 29.4 | $104,808.00 | $87,493.00 | 42.04 | 105.20 | $2,018.00 | 78.62 | 4.10% | -2.89% | 66.24 | 16.92% | 22.20% | 53.2 | 17.86% | 2.90% |
| 122 | Hartford | CT | 51.47 | 14.2 | $82,719.00 | $46,411.00 | 58.9 | 102.75 | $1,269.00 | 72.85 | 5.50% | -1.90% | 58.38 | 17.68% | 27% | 55.71 | 14.97% | 6.35% |
| 123 | Alexandria | VA | 51.1 | 41.12 | $120,602.00 | $119,681.00 | 35.06 | 108.88 | $2,089.00 | 80.69 | 3.70% | -2.77% | 69.26 | 16.44% | 20.70% | 42.7 | 18.60% | 6% |
| 124 | Bakersfield | CA | 50.86 | 20.83 | $50,641.00 | $80,540.00 | 58.27 | 100.89 | $1,472.00 | 55.87 | 9.20% | -0.96% | 53.06 | 21.78% | 23.60% | 68.14 | 10.48% | 8.25% |
| 125 | Henderson | NV | 50.82 | 25.71 | $66,952.00 | $90,138.00 | 53.2 | 100.22 | $1,824.00 | 75.39 | 5.80% | 2% | 54.98 | 21.94% | 21.80% | 49.4 | 15.30% | 8.38% |
| 126 | Chico | CA | 50.56 | 17.93 | $61,191.00 | $66,977.00 | 57.51 | 101.20 | $1,488.00 | 65.88 | 6.60% | -3.49% | 55.25 | 21.50% | 22.40% | 58.62 | 12.32% | 9.25% |
| 127 | Vancouver | WA | 50.51 | 23.62 | $72,024.00 | $81,338.00 | 47.19 | 105.42 | $1,702.00 | 76.09 | 5% | -1.11% | 62.09 | 18.59% | 22.40% | 51.98 | 14.29% | 8.90% |
| 128 | Irving | TX | 50.4 | 25.31 | $84,975.00 | $81,830.00 | 52.28 | 103.09 | $1,619.00 | 79.67 | 4.30% | -0.93% | 59.09 | 19.75% | 22.60% | 39.25 | 18.04% | 8.25% |
| 129 | Visalia | CA | 50.4 | 21.57 | $53,098.00 | $81,989.00 | 59.62 | 99.83 | $1,490.00 | 45.79 | 11.10% | -1.81% | 55.27 | 21.54% | 22.30% | 68.51 | 10.22% | 8.50% |
| 130 | North Las Vegas | NV | 50.33 | 22.46 | $66,952.00 | $79,542.00 | 55.27 | 100.22 | $1,705.00 | 75.39 | 5.80% | 2% | 52.7 | 21.94% | 23.60% | 49.4 | 15.30% | 8.38% |
| 131 | Grand Prairie | TX | 50.33 | 25.24 | $84,975.00 | $81,619.00 | 52.1 | 103.09 | $1,629.00 | 79.67 | 4.30% | -0.93% | 59.09 | 19.75% | 22.60% | 39.25 | 18.04% | 8.25% |
| 132 | Stockton | CA | 50.11 | 22.11 | $63,017.00 | $79,907.00 | 49.88 | 105.09 | $1,577.00 | 69.07 | 6.80% | 0.56% | 56.39 | 19.98% | 24.30% | 60.53 | 11.99% | 9% |
| 133 | Urban Honolulu | HI | 49.8 | 25.51 | $74,681.00 | $86,504.00 | 36.44 | 110.96 | $1,823.00 | 91.56 | 2.10% | 0.27% | 42.71 | 24.52% | 26.70% | 76.57 | 13.64% | 0% |
| 134 | Garland | TX | 49.77 | 23.62 | $84,975.00 | $76,320.00 | 51.89 | 103.09 | $1,641.00 | 79.67 | 4.30% | -0.93% | 58.2 | 19.75% | 23.30% | 39.25 | 18.04% | 8.25% |
| 135 | Tampa | FL | 49.47 | 21.31 | $67,712.00 | $75,475.00 | 54.29 | 100.89 | $1,701.00 | 74.35 | 5% | -2.80% | 50.39 | 24.11% | 21.40% | 51.27 | 15.38% | 7.50% |
| 136 | Port St. Lucie | FL | 49.44 | 21.62 | $56,971.00 | $80,648.00 | 51.22 | 100.23 | $1,937.00 | 72.84 | 5.70% | -0.96% | 45.73 | 23.61% | 26% | 64.52 | 12.24% | 7% |
| 137 | St. Petersburg | FL | 49.04 | 22.48 | $78,288.00 | $75,192.00 | 54.95 | 100.89 | $1,663.00 | 74.93 | 4.80% | -3.18% | 48.11 | 24.11% | 23.20% | 47.98 | 16.57% | 7% |
| 138 | Modesto | CA | 48.96 | 21.36 | $56,741.00 | $79,891.00 | 49.45 | 104.11 | $1,690.00 | 63.73 | 7.40% | -1.81% | 54.55 | 21.42% | 23.10% | 62.54 | 11.54% | 8.88% |
| 139 | New Haven | CT | 48.74 | 16.35 | $73,967.00 | $56,851.00 | 52.26 | 104.56 | $1,488.00 | 68.76 | 5.50% | -5.89% | 56.21 | 20.87% | 22.80% | 54.9 | 15.18% | 6.35% |
| 140 | Orlando | FL | 48.65 | 19.77 | $62,855.00 | $72,336.00 | 52.66 | 101.42 | $1,747.00 | 74.58 | 4.80% | -3.52% | 48.59 | 24.12% | 22.80% | 53.26 | 15.51% | 6.50% |
| 141 | Elk Grove | CA | 48.46 | 36.98 | $69,693.00 | $125,924.00 | 35.51 | 106.67 | $2,262.00 | 76.2 | 5.20% | -0.05% | 52.88 | 22.40% | 22.60% | 56.06 | 13.32% | 8.75% |
| 142 | Fontana | CA | 47.99 | 28.05 | $53,991.00 | $102,821.00 | 43.22 | 106.44 | $1,839.00 | 75.25 | 5.30% | -0.50% | 42.25 | 25.42% | 25.40% | 64.53 | 11.10% | 8.75% |
| 143 | San Bernardino | CA | 47.68 | 17.21 | $53,991.00 | $67,415.00 | 48.97 | 106.44 | $1,508.00 | 75.25 | 5.30% | -0.50% | 42.88 | 25.42% | 24.90% | 64.53 | 11.10% | 8.75% |
| 144 | Victorville | CA | 47.4 | 19.35 | $53,991.00 | $74,410.00 | 47.06 | 106.44 | $1,618.00 | 75.25 | 5.30% | -0.50% | 42.25 | 25.42% | 25.40% | 64.53 | 11.10% | 8.75% |
| 145 | Everett | WA | 47.36 | 25.04 | $78,447.00 | $83,512.00 | 37.61 | 111.13 | $1,740.00 | 68.19 | 6% | -4.08% | 58.33 | 19.10% | 24.40% | 61.18 | 14.28% | – |
| 146 | Fairfield | CA | 46.85 | 29.4 | $67,744.00 | $101,895.00 | 32.61 | 108.48 | $2,266.00 | 75.11 | 5.50% | 0.30% | 54.07 | 20.98% | 24.30% | 60.74 | 12.34% | 8.38% |
| 147 | Riverside | CA | 46.77 | 24.73 | $56,404.00 | $91,045.00 | 41.91 | 106.44 | $1,914.00 | 74.92 | 5.50% | 0.12% | 43.26 | 25.42% | 24.60% | 62.39 | 11.66% | 8.75% |
| 148 | Bridgeport | CT | 46.38 | 20.83 | $106,897.00 | $58,685.00 | 49.32 | 106.86 | $1,450.00 | 68.39 | 6.20% | -2.94% | 50.86 | 20.24% | 28.20% | 46.6 | 17.35% | 6.35% |
| 149 | Rancho Cucamonga | CA | 46.32 | 30.82 | $53,991.00 | $111,895.00 | 34.21 | 106.44 | $2,357.00 | 75.25 | 5.30% | -0.50% | 42.75 | 25.42% | 25% | 67.01 | 11.10% | 7.75% |
| 150 | Tacoma | WA | 46.19 | 24.58 | $68,414.00 | $85,884.00 | 38.72 | 111.13 | $1,676.00 | 67.51 | 6.40% | -2.85% | 57.6 | 19.58% | 24.10% | 53.43 | 12.93% | 10.40% |
| 151 | Cape Coral | FL | 46.19 | 22.43 | $70,329.00 | $78,104.00 | 49.28 | 102.35 | $1,858.00 | 71.55 | 5.60% | -2.70% | 42.83 | 25.44% | 24.90% | 50.82 | 16.15% | 6.50% |
| 152 | Yonkers | NY | 46.07 | 31.95 | $136,419.00 | $83,549.00 | 34.61 | 112.56 | $1,784.00 | 85.23 | 3.60% | 1.19% | 57.37 | 20.54% | 22.50% | 33.59 | 22.28% | 4% |
| 153 | Ontario | CA | 45.92 | 23.8 | $53,991.00 | $88,941.00 | 39.9 | 106.44 | $2,030.00 | 75.25 | 5.30% | -0.50% | 41.1 | 25.42% | 26.30% | 64.53 | 11.10% | 8.75% |
| 154 | Sunnyvale | CA | 45.77 | 65.87 | $157,620.00 | $186,170.00 | 16.14 | 110.42 | $3,039.00 | 81.24 | 4.20% | 0.13% | 58.37 | 21.41% | 20.10% | 26.01 | 20.93% | 9.13% |
| 155 | Santa Clara | CA | 45.43 | 63.66 | $157,620.00 | $178,958.00 | 16.54 | 110.42 | $3,016.00 | 81.24 | 4.20% | 0.13% | 58.24 | 21.41% | 20.20% | 26.01 | 20.93% | 9.13% |
| 156 | Moreno Valley | CA | 45.37 | 25.4 | $56,404.00 | $93,222.00 | 38.07 | 106.44 | $2,135.00 | 74.92 | 5.50% | 0.12% | 41.36 | 25.42% | 26.10% | 62.39 | 11.66% | 8.75% |
| 157 | Stamford | CT | 45.1 | 43.98 | $165,513.00 | $111,586.00 | 34.96 | 106.86 | $2,276.00 | 74.93 | 4.80% | -3.18% | 55.68 | 20.24% | 24.40% | 22.92 | 23.54% | 6.35% |
| 158 | Cambridge | MA | 45.09 | 43.49 | $112,011.00 | $130,748.00 | 23.89 | 108.27 | $2,787.00 | 76.76 | 4.60% | -2.34% | 58.16 | 21.93% | 19.30% | 40.54 | 19% | 6.25% |
| 159 | Quincy | MA | 44.61 | 34.65 | $119,680.00 | $98,882.00 | 35.52 | 108.27 | $2,118.00 | 76.71 | 4.60% | -2.39% | 49.92 | 21.93% | 25.80% | 36.93 | 19.95% | 6.25% |
| 160 | Santa Rosa | CA | 43.87 | 31.04 | $88,832.00 | $99,060.00 | 35.68 | 107.78 | $2,152.00 | 78.01 | 4.60% | -1.12% | 42.98 | 25.70% | 24.30% | 44.41 | 15.55% | 10% |
| 161 | Oxnard | CA | 43.49 | 29.42 | $82,558.00 | $96,212.00 | 33.47 | 110.53 | $2,032.00 | 76.45 | 5% | -0.76% | 44.9 | 24.61% | 24.80% | 47.48 | 15.24% | 9.25% |
| 162 | Fremont | CA | 42.91 | 58.93 | $111,268.00 | $181,506.00 | 9.87 | 115.61 | $2,933.00 | 78.44 | 4.60% | -0.70% | 56.67 | 21.87% | 20.60% | 33.76 | 18.18% | 10.25% |
| 163 | Newark | NJ | 42.84 | 15.95 | $82,871.00 | $52,060.00 | 41.43 | 112.56 | $1,392.00 | 74.68 | 5.70% | 0.83% | 50.17 | 19.56% | 30% | 39.9 | 18.92% | 6.63% |
| 164 | Berkeley | CA | 41.91 | 36.47 | $111,268.00 | $108,092.00 | 23.78 | 115.61 | $2,133.00 | 78.44 | 4.60% | -0.70% | 53.24 | 21.87% | 23.30% | 33.76 | 18.18% | 10.25% |
| 165 | Oakland | CA | 41.82 | 34.48 | $111,268.00 | $101,600.00 | 26.46 | 115.61 | $1,979.00 | 78.44 | 4.60% | -0.70% | 51.72 | 21.87% | 24.50% | 32.52 | 18.18% | 10.75% |
| 166 | Richmond | CA | 41.36 | 32.22 | $108,259.00 | $95,391.00 | 26.79 | 115.61 | $1,960.00 | 77.26 | 4.80% | -0.91% | 50.07 | 21.87% | 25.80% | 35.14 | 18.14% | 9.75% |
| 167 | Chula Vista | CA | 40.97 | 33.24 | $84,312.00 | $108,032.00 | 27.93 | 111.89 | $2,229.00 | 77.9 | 4.70% | -0.75% | 36.02 | 27.53% | 26.40% | 46.98 | 15.69% | 8.75% |
| 168 | Jersey City | NJ | 40.84 | 29.91 | $82,814.00 | $97,710.00 | 30.74 | 112.56 | $2,007.00 | 82.26 | 4.30% | 1.60% | 31.17 | 30.84% | 24.10% | 47.12 | 17.04% | 6.63% |
| 169 | Oceanside | CA | 40.14 | 30.09 | $84,312.00 | $97,737.00 | 26.65 | 111.89 | $2,303.00 | 77.9 | 4.70% | -0.75% | 36.02 | 27.53% | 26.40% | 48.22 | 15.69% | 8.25% |
| 170 | Huntington Beach | CA | 39.8 | 38.34 | $94,034.00 | $120,919.00 | 20.43 | 113.57 | $2,510.00 | 80.27 | 4.10% | -1.29% | 36.46 | 28.43% | 24.40% | 44.51 | 16.99% | 7.75% |
| 171 | Santa Ana | CA | 39.75 | 30.11 | $94,034.00 | $93,999.00 | 27.87 | 113.57 | $2,082.00 | 80.27 | 4.10% | -1.29% | 36.08 | 28.43% | 24.70% | 40.78 | 16.99% | 9.25% |
| 172 | Anaheim | CA | 39.6 | 30.48 | $94,034.00 | $95,227.00 | 26.25 | 113.57 | $2,175.00 | 80.27 | 4.10% | -1.29% | 34.56 | 28.43% | 25.90% | 44.51 | 16.99% | 7.75% |
| 173 | Santa Maria | CA | 39.47 | 26.6 | $88,347.00 | $84,746.00 | 38.04 | 108.80 | $1,925.00 | 75.07 | 5.50% | 0.27% | 25.78 | 33.09% | 24.20% | 42.14 | 16.96% | 8.75% |
| 174 | Fort Lauderdale | FL | 38.88 | 24.46 | $74,506.00 | $83,130.00 | 30.91 | 114.16 | $1,854.00 | 74.95 | 4.70% | -3.63% | 33.73 | 29.10% | 25.30% | 44.84 | 17.39% | 7% |
| 175 | Irvine | CA | 38.48 | 43.18 | $94,034.00 | $136,719.00 | 11.96 | 113.57 | $2,997.00 | 80.27 | 4.10% | -1.29% | 37.73 | 28.43% | 23.40% | 44.51 | 16.99% | 7.75% |
| 176 | Long Beach | CA | 38.45 | 26.89 | $83,888.00 | $87,430.00 | 31.53 | 113.57 | $1,871.00 | 74.8 | 5.60% | 0.48% | 33.7 | 29.28% | 25% | 37.65 | 16.99% | 10.50% |
| 177 | West Palm Beach | FL | 38.4 | 27.72 | $126,852.00 | $73,446.00 | 32.34 | 114.16 | $1,772.00 | 75.34 | 4.90% | -2.31% | 43.48 | 24.19% | 26.70% | 21.09 | 21.27% | – |
| 178 | Torrance | CA | 38.24 | 35.7 | $83,888.00 | $116,217.00 | 24.42 | 113.57 | $2,280.00 | 74.8 | 5.60% | 0.48% | 34.08 | 29.28% | 24.70% | 38.27 | 16.99% | 10.25% |
| 179 | Coral Springs | FL | 38.17 | 27.66 | $74,506.00 | $93,602.00 | 26.91 | 114.16 | $2,084.00 | 74.95 | 4.70% | -3.63% | 34.12 | 29.10% | 25% | 43.34 | 17.39% | – |
| 180 | Pembroke Pines | FL | 37.83 | 25.06 | $74,506.00 | $85,104.00 | 27.57 | 114.16 | $2,046.00 | 74.95 | 4.70% | -3.63% | 33.99 | 29.10% | 25.10% | 43.34 | 17.39% | – |
| 181 | Salinas | CA | 37.6 | 27.11 | $74,175.00 | $91,908.00 | 36.51 | 109.04 | $1,991.00 | 46.02 | 10.60% | -3.95% | 33 | 30.82% | 22.70% | 51.48 | 14.19% | 9.25% |
| 182 | Burbank | CA | 37.29 | 29.84 | $83,888.00 | $97,082.00 | 25.95 | 113.57 | $2,192.00 | 74.8 | 5.60% | 0.48% | 33.32 | 29.28% | 25.30% | 37.65 | 16.99% | 10.50% |
| 183 | Santa Clarita | CA | 37.22 | 37.79 | $83,888.00 | $123,062.00 | 19.83 | 113.57 | $2,544.00 | 74.8 | 5.60% | 0.48% | 32.81 | 29.28% | 25.70% | 39.52 | 16.99% | 9.75% |
| 184 | Pasadena | CA | 37.05 | 32.33 | $83,888.00 | $105,192.00 | 24.69 | 113.57 | $2,265.00 | 74.8 | 5.60% | 0.48% | 31.54 | 29.28% | 26.70% | 37.65 | 16.99% | 10.50% |
| 185 | Glendale | CA | 36.58 | 27.18 | $83,888.00 | $88,393.00 | 26.13 | 113.57 | $2,182.00 | 74.8 | 5.60% | 0.48% | 32.18 | 29.28% | 26.20% | 37.65 | 16.99% | 10.50% |
| 186 | Hialeah | FL | 35.27 | 16.52 | $78,567.00 | $55,594.00 | 33.78 | 114.16 | $1,689.00 | 88.27 | 2.80% | 0.37% | 16.14 | 33.52% | 31% | 35.75 | 19.77% | 7% |
Where Middle-Class Budgets Face the Greatest Pressure
The lowest-ranked cities weren’t necessarily weak economies. In fact, they all posted high economic stability scores. Where many feel a financial pinch stems from a combination of expensive housing, elevated living costs, and heavier tax burdens that reduce the purchasing power of middle-class earnings.
186. Hialeah, FL
Hialeah, Florida, ranks last for middle-class spending power. As part of the greater Miami metropolitan area, Hialeah faces serious challenges with housing affordability — a growing crisis in South Florida — solidifying its low ranking on the list. The city posts one of the highest rent-to-income ratios (33.52%) among the rankings and also a high effective tax rate (19.8%), making it harder for middle-class families to stretch their dollar.
Key Stats:
- Rent-to-Income Ratio: 33.52%
- Median Housing Owner Costs as % of Income: 31%
- Effective Tax Rate: 19.77%
185. Glendale, CA
Glendale, California, ranks second-lowest due to a weak cost-of-living score. Located in the greater Los Angeles metropolitan area, Glendale struggles with regional affordability, as displayed in its high housing costs and tax burden. The city faces similar financial headwinds to its neighbor, Los Angeles, recording a high median gross rent of $2,182, a city sales tax rate of 10.5%, and a rent-to-income ratio of 29.3%.
Key Stats:
- Rent-to-Income Ratio: 29.28%
- Median Gross Rent: $2,182
- City Sales Tax Rate (Combined): 10.5%
184. Pasadena, CA
Pasadena, California, wraps up the bottom rankings, with a weak cost-of-living score. While Pasadena has a higher median income than its neighboring city, Glendale, it still faces similar inflation-related challenges that affect affordability. Like Glendale, its financial pressures are most evident in a high median gross rent of $2,265, a rent-to-income ratio of 29.28%, and a city sales tax rate of 10.5%.
Key Stats:
- Rent-to-Income Ratio: 29.28%
- Median Gross Rent: $2,265
- City Sales Tax Rate (Combined): 10.5%
What This Means for Middle-Class America
While the online narrative may point to maximizing salaries for better financial health, our study shows income isn’t everything. In fact, where you live can shape financial standing more than anything else, impacting how much middle-class earners can keep of what they’ve earned.
As affordability concerns rise across the U.S., cities with low housing costs, stable economies, and lower taxes are the ones looking most attractive to Americans, despite lower earning potential.
For media inquiries, please reach out to catherine@cardrates.com.
Methodology
The methodology below explains the data inputs, scoring approach, and weighted metric framework used for this ranking.
Overview
This study evaluates where middle-class earnings stretch the furthest across 186 major U.S. cities, using economic indicators that reflect both earning potential and living costs across five dimensions: income, cost of living, economic stability, housing affordability, and tax burden. Cities were selected based on U.S. Census Bureau data and represent all U.S. cities with a population of 300,000 or more. Future editions will expand the analysis to small cities.
Data & Sources
Data for this study were sourced from reputable national organizations, including the Bureau of Economic Analysis, U.S. Census Bureau, Bureau of Labor Statistics, HUD Housing Data, IRS Statistics of Income, and official state tax authority sources. Each source was selected for its reliability and relevance to the metrics being analyzed. The data collected offers a robust foundation for understanding the economic conditions affecting middle-class households in urban settings.
Scoring Approach
The scoring approach assigns points to each city across five sections: Earning Power, Cost of Living, Economic Stability, Housing Affordability, and Tax Burden. Metrics are normalized on a 0–100 scale, and final scores are weighted averages of each section’s component metrics. Cost of Living carries the most weight (30 pts) because rent and price levels are the most immediate financial pressure households face. Earning Power and Housing Affordability are weighted equally (20 pts each) since income and housing costs are the two dominant drivers of financial stability. Economic Stability and Tax Burden (15 pts each) are weighted lower as they tend to change more slowly and have a less acute effect on monthly cash flow.
Caveats
While this study aims to provide a comprehensive analysis, certain limitations must be acknowledged. The data is subject to the accuracy and timeliness of the sources, which may vary by region and metric. Additionally, the study does not account for qualitative factors such as lifestyle preferences or cultural amenities that may influence a family’s decision to live in a particular city. The findings should be interpreted as a guide rather than an exhaustive assessment, recognizing that individual experiences may differ based on personal circumstances.
Cities Evaluated: 186
Sources Used: 6
Scoring Process
Each selected metric is pulled for all eligible cities and transformed to a standardized 0-100 scale. Directionality is applied per metric (higher-is-better or lower-is-better). Optional divide-by metrics are computed as ratio values before normalization. Section scores are calculated as weighted averages of their component metrics. Final scores are computed as weighted averages of section scores using section point allocations.
Data Sources: Bureau of Economic Analysis, U.S. Census Bureau, Bureau of Labor Statistics
HUD Housing Data, IRS Statistics of Income, Official state tax authority sources (state-by-state)
Section and Metric Weights
To determine where middle-class earnings go the furthest, we evaluated 186 U.S. cities across these five scoring dimensions:
Earning Power (20 pts · 2 metrics)
The Earning Power section assesses the financial capacity of households in each city, focusing on income levels that impact the overall economic well-being of middle-class families. This section includes metrics such as Per Capita Personal Income and Median Household Income, which provide insights into the average earnings and economic conditions faced by residents. By analyzing these metrics, the study aims to highlight cities where residents can expect to earn a reasonable income relative to their living costs, thereby indicating greater economic opportunities for families.
Per Capita Personal Income
Per Capita Personal Income measures the average income earned per person in a given area, providing insight into the economic well-being of individuals. This metric is crucial for understanding earning potential in different cities, as it reflects the financial resources available to residents. A higher per capita income indicates greater economic opportunities and can influence migration patterns and local investments. The raw transformation means that the metric is interpreted directly, allowing for straightforward comparisons across cities, where higher values signify better earning power.
Median Household Income
Median Household Income represents the middle income value of households in a specific area, adjusted for inflation, and serves as a key indicator of economic health and living standards. This metric is particularly relevant to this study as it highlights the financial stability of families, which directly impacts their quality of life and spending power. The raw transformation allows for direct comparisons, with higher median incomes suggesting a more prosperous environment for families, thereby influencing decisions on relocation and investment in these cities.
Cost of Living (30 pts · 2 metrics)
The Cost of Living section evaluates the affordability of living in each city, focusing on the expenses that middle-class families typically incur. This section incorporates metrics such as Regional Price Parity and Median Gross Rent, which together provide a comprehensive view of living costs. By examining these metrics, the study aims to identify cities where living expenses are manageable relative to income levels, thus allowing families to maintain a comfortable lifestyle without excessive financial strain.
Regional Price Parity (Overall)
Regional Price Parity (Overall) measures the relative price levels of goods and services in a city compared to the national average, with a baseline of 100. This metric is significant as it indicates how far a dollar can stretch in different locations, directly impacting the purchasing power of residents. In this study, a lower Regional Price Parity score is favorable, as it suggests that living costs are more affordable, allowing middle-class families to allocate their income more effectively. The metric is used in its raw form, where lower values contribute positively to the overall score.
Median Gross Rent
Median Gross Rent reflects the median amount that renters pay for housing, providing a clear indicator of housing affordability in a city. This metric is crucial for middle-class families, as housing costs often represent the largest portion of their monthly expenses. A lower median rent suggests that families can find affordable housing options, which is essential for financial stability. In this study, the metric is scored in its raw form, with lower values contributing positively to the overall score, thereby highlighting cities where housing is more accessible.
Economic Stability (15 pts · 2 metrics)
The Economic Stability section examines the resilience of the labor market in each city, focusing on employment metrics that reflect job security and economic health. This section includes metrics such as the Unemployment Rate and Employment Year-over-Year Change Percentage, which provide insights into the stability of job opportunities for middle-class families. By analyzing these metrics, the study aims to identify cities where residents are more likely to have stable employment, which is a critical factor in determining the overall economic environment.
Unemployment Rate
The Unemployment Rate measures the percentage of the labor force that is actively seeking work but unable to find employment. This metric is vital as it indicates the health of the job market in a city, with lower unemployment rates suggesting a more robust economy and greater job availability. In the context of this study, a lower unemployment rate is favorable, as it implies that middle-class families have better access to stable employment opportunities. This metric is used in its raw form, where lower values contribute positively to the overall score.
Employment YoY Change (%)
Employment YoY Change (%) measures the percentage change in the number of employed persons compared to the same month in the previous year, reflecting the job market’s health and stability. This metric is vital for assessing economic resilience in different cities, as employment growth can indicate a thriving economy and attract new residents. The raw transformation allows for straightforward interpretation, where a higher percentage signifies a stronger job market, thus enhancing the attractiveness of a city for potential movers and investors.
Housing Affordability (20 pts · 2 metrics)
The Housing Affordability section evaluates the financial burden of housing costs on middle-class families, focusing on metrics that quantify housing expenses relative to income. This section includes the Rent-to-Income Ratio and Median Owner Costs as a Percentage of Income, which together provide a comprehensive view of how affordable housing is in each city. By examining these metrics, the study aims to identify cities where families can secure housing without overextending their budgets, which is crucial for long-term financial stability.
Rent-to-Income Ratio
The Rent-to-Income Ratio measures the percentage of the area median income that is spent on rent for a two-bedroom unit. This metric is essential as it highlights the affordability of rental housing for middle-class families, with lower ratios indicating that families are spending a smaller portion of their income on housing. A lower Rent-to-Income Ratio is favorable, as it suggests that families can allocate more of their income towards savings and other essential expenses. This metric is used in its raw form, where lower values contribute positively to the overall score.
Median Owner Costs as % of Income
Median Owner Costs as a Percentage of Income measures the median monthly costs for homeowners (including mortgage payments) as a percentage of household income. This metric is crucial for understanding the financial burden of homeownership on middle-class families. A lower percentage indicates that families are spending a smaller share of their income on housing costs, which is beneficial for financial health and stability. In this study, this metric is also scored in its raw form, with lower values leading to better rankings, thereby emphasizing cities where homeownership is more attainable.
Tax Burden (15 pts · 2 metrics)
The Tax Burden section assesses the financial impact of taxation on middle-class families, focusing on metrics that quantify tax obligations relative to income. This section includes the Effective Tax Rate and City Sales Tax Rate, which together provide insights into the overall tax landscape in each city. By analyzing these metrics, the study aims to identify cities where families can retain a larger portion of their earnings, thus enhancing their financial well-being and disposable income.
Effective Tax Rate
The Effective Tax Rate measures the average tax paid as a percentage of Adjusted Gross Income (AGI). This metric is significant as it reflects the overall tax burden on residents, with lower rates indicating that families retain more of their income. In the context of this study, a lower effective tax rate is favorable, as it suggests that middle-class families have more disposable income to spend on necessities and savings. This metric is used in its raw form, where lower values contribute positively to the overall score.
City Sales Tax Rate (Combined)
The City Sales Tax Rate (Combined) reflects the total state and local sales tax rate applicable to purchases made in the city. This metric is important as it indicates the additional costs families face when making everyday purchases. A lower combined sales tax rate is favorable, as it allows families to keep more of their earnings for discretionary spending. In this study, this metric is scored in its raw form, with lower values contributing positively to the overall score, thereby highlighting cities with a more favorable tax environment for middle-class households.
Notes: Values are normalized comparatively within this specific study configuration and city set. Changing metrics, weights, section points, filters, tags, or divide-by choices changes the final rankings. Within the Economic Stability section, the Unemployment Rate is weighted at 2× while Employment Year-over-Year Change is weighted at 0.5×. This reflects the distinction between a current condition and a directional trend. A city’s unemployment rate tells you what the job market looks like today; YoY employment change tells you which direction it’s moving. Both matter, but for middle-class families evaluating financial stability, the present state of the labor market is a more reliable signal than short-term growth fluctuations, which can be volatile and influenced by seasonal or one-time factors.
Editorial Note: Our site content is not provided or commissioned by any credit card issuer(s). Opinions expressed on CardRates.com are the author's alone, not those of any credit card issuer, and have not been reviewed, approved, or otherwise endorsed by credit card issuers. Every reasonable effort has been made to maintain accurate information; however, all credit card offer details, including information about rewards, signup bonuses, introductory offers, and other terms and conditions, is presented without warranty. Clicking on any offer on CardRates.com will direct you to the issuer's website, where you can review the current terms and conditions of the offer.
About the Author
