Mundevo
City comparison·United States flagAustinvsUnited States flagSan Francisco

Austin vs San Francisco: cost, quality of life, and the winner

Austin (composite 5.4) vs San Francisco (composite 4.4). Side-by-side on affordability, quality of life, remote-work friendliness and healthcare — with the calculation behind each score.

Composite scores

Overall: Austin wins by 1.0 points

Austin composite
5.4 / 10
fair
San Francisco composite
4.4 / 10
fair
Analyst take

Austin's 5.4 score edges San Francisco's 4.4 by a full point, suggesting meaningfully lower cost-of-living or better affordability relative to quality of life compared to the Bay Area.

San Francisco typically ranks higher on innovation and wage metrics, yet Austin's advantage here points to a widening gap in living cost efficiency favoring Texas.

What to do

If affordability relative to opportunity matters most, run Austin's specific rent, tax, and wage data against your personal budget before assuming San Francisco remains the default choice.

Score-by-score, side-by-side

Each axis is scored independently with disclosed weights and a calculation string.

AxisAustinSan FranciscoWinner
Affordability2.30.0Austin +2.3
Quality of life6.76.0Austin +0.7
Remote-work friendliness7.26.7Austin +0.5
Healthcare5.25.0Austin +0.2
Score card · Austin
5.4/ 10 compositefair

Each axis is a weighted aggregate of underlying indicators normalized to a 0–10 scale. Weights are explicit and disclosed per axis. The composite is the unweighted mean of the four axes — axes are not collapsed further because the underlying trade-offs (e.g. low cost vs poor air quality) are user-dependent.

Affordability

2.3poor
  • Cost-of-living index (weight 60%)78
  • Rent index (weight 40%)75
How this is calculated

Affordability = ((100 − costIndex)/100 × 0.6 + (100 − rentIndex)/100 × 0.4) × 10. For Austin: ((100 − 78)/100 × 0.6 + (100 − 75)/100 × 0.4) × 10 = 2.3.

Austin is among the more expensive cities tracked. Salary expectations should be calibrated to the high cost base before relocating.

Quality of life

6.7good
  • Safety index (weight 40%)60
  • Healthcare index (weight 35%)70
  • Air quality index (weight 25%)75
How this is calculated

QoL = (safety/100 × 0.4 + healthcare/100 × 0.35 + airQuality/100 × 0.25) × 10. For Austin: (60/100 × 0.4 + 70/100 × 0.35 + 75/100 × 0.25) × 10 = 6.7.

Austin has a mixed quality profile. Safety: good; healthcare: good; air: good. Weigh the weakest axis against your personal priorities.

Remote-work friendliness

7.2good
  • Internet (median Mbps) (weight 45%)280 Mbps
  • Effective income tax (lower = better) (weight 30%)17.0%
  • Cost-of-living (lower = better) (weight 25%)78
How this is calculated

RemoteWork = (min(Mbps/300, 1) × 0.45 + (1 − incomeTax) × 0.3 + (100 − costIndex)/100 × 0.25) × 10. For Austin: (min(280/300, 1) × 0.45 + (1 − 0.17) × 0.3 + (100 − 78)/100 × 0.25) × 10 = 7.2.

Austin combines fast internet (280 Mbps median), a 17% effective income tax and cost index 78 — a strong configuration for remote workers earning in a stronger currency.

Healthcare

5.2fair
  • Healthcare quality index (weight 70%)70
  • Healthcare out-of-pocket / month (lower = better) (weight 30%)450
How this is calculated

Healthcare = (qualityIndex/100 × 0.7 + max(0, 1 − OOP/500) × 0.3) × 10. For Austin: (70/100 × 0.7 + max(0, 1 − 450/500) × 0.3) × 10 = 5.2.

Austin has trade-offs in healthcare: quality is good, typical out-of-pocket cost is ~450 USD/month. Cross-border insurance closes the gap.

Score card · San Francisco
4.4/ 10 compositefair

Each axis is a weighted aggregate of underlying indicators normalized to a 0–10 scale. Weights are explicit and disclosed per axis. The composite is the unweighted mean of the four axes — axes are not collapsed further because the underlying trade-offs (e.g. low cost vs poor air quality) are user-dependent.

Affordability

0.0poor
  • Cost-of-living index (weight 60%)120
  • Rent index (weight 40%)115
How this is calculated

Affordability = ((100 − costIndex)/100 × 0.6 + (100 − rentIndex)/100 × 0.4) × 10. For San Francisco: ((100 − 120)/100 × 0.6 + (100 − 115)/100 × 0.4) × 10 = 0.

San Francisco is among the more expensive cities tracked. Salary expectations should be calibrated to the high cost base before relocating.

Quality of life

6.0good
  • Safety index (weight 40%)45
  • Healthcare index (weight 35%)72
  • Air quality index (weight 25%)68
How this is calculated

QoL = (safety/100 × 0.4 + healthcare/100 × 0.35 + airQuality/100 × 0.25) × 10. For San Francisco: (45/100 × 0.4 + 72/100 × 0.35 + 68/100 × 0.25) × 10 = 6.

San Francisco has a mixed quality profile. Safety: fair; healthcare: good; air: good. Weigh the weakest axis against your personal priorities.

Remote-work friendliness

6.7good
  • Internet (median Mbps) (weight 45%)280 Mbps
  • Effective income tax (lower = better) (weight 30%)17.0%
  • Cost-of-living (lower = better) (weight 25%)120
How this is calculated

RemoteWork = (min(Mbps/300, 1) × 0.45 + (1 − incomeTax) × 0.3 + (100 − costIndex)/100 × 0.25) × 10. For San Francisco: (min(280/300, 1) × 0.45 + (1 − 0.17) × 0.3 + (100 − 120)/100 × 0.25) × 10 = 6.7.

San Francisco works for remote work but isn't optimized for it: internet 280 Mbps, income tax 17%, cost index 120.

Healthcare

5.0fair
  • Healthcare quality index (weight 70%)72
  • Healthcare out-of-pocket / month (lower = better) (weight 30%)500
How this is calculated

Healthcare = (qualityIndex/100 × 0.7 + max(0, 1 − OOP/500) × 0.3) × 10. For San Francisco: (72/100 × 0.7 + max(0, 1 − 500/500) × 0.3) × 10 = 5.

San Francisco has trade-offs in healthcare: quality is good, typical out-of-pocket cost is ~500 USD/month. Cross-border insurance closes the gap.

Monthly cost delta: Austin vs San Francisco

Normalized to USD at 1 USD = 1.0000 USD.

CategoryAustinSan FranciscoChange
housing$2,200$3,500+59%
food$600$700+17%
transport$60$80+33%
utilities$220$200-9%
leisure$600$700+17%
healthcare$450$500+11%

Where each city's money goes

Two cities can have the same monthly total but very different shapes — one might burn 50% on housing while the other splits more evenly. The composition matters as much as the headline.

Austin53% housing
San Francisco62% housing
housing
food
transport
utilities
leisure
healthcare

The biggest shape difference is housing: San Francisco spends 8.4 percentage points more of its budget on it (62% vs. 53%). If you're sensitive to that category, weight the per-axis scores accordingly.

Salary equivalence: Austin ↔ San Francisco

What earning the same purchasing power costs in each city. Cost-adjusted using the local cost-of-living index (Austin = 78, San Francisco = 120); currency-converted at 1 USD = 1.0000 USD. Tax differences are not modeled.

Earning in Austin, moving to San Francisco
USD → equivalent USD
Austin grossSan Francisco equivalent
$40,000$61,538
$75,000$115,385
$120,000$184,615
Earning in San Francisco, moving to Austin
USD → equivalent USD
San Francisco grossAustin equivalent
$40,000$26,000
$75,000$48,750
$120,000$78,000

Equivalence here means same cost-of-living purchasing power, not same net take-home. Effective tax rates differ between countries; a salary equivalent on cost can still net more or less depending on the destination's tax regime. Use the calculator for tax-adjusted figures at a specific lifestyle tier.

Pros and cons

Why pick Austin

  • Wins on affordability (+2.3 points vs San Francisco).
  • Wins on quality of life (+0.7 points vs San Francisco).
  • Wins on remote-work friendliness (+0.5 points vs San Francisco).

Why pick San Francisco

San Francisco doesn't have any standout advantages of ≥0.3 points on the scoring model.

Austin trade-offs

No material trade-offs versus San Francisco on the scored axes.

San Francisco trade-offs

  • Trails Austin on affordability by 2.3 points.
  • Trails Austin on quality of life by 0.7 points.
  • Trails Austin on remote-work friendliness by 0.5 points.

Who should choose which

The composite winner doesn't always match what matters to you. These four reader profiles weigh the axes differently — find the closest fit.

Young remote pro

Single, salaried remote worker, 25-40, optimizing for runway + bandwidth.

Best fit
Austin by 1.4 points
Austin4.8/10
San Francisco3.4/10

Axes scored: affordability, remoteWork

Family with kids

Couple with school-age children, prioritizing safety, healthcare, and air quality.

Best fit
Austin by 0.5 points
Austin6.0/10
San Francisco5.5/10

Axes scored: qualityOfLife, healthcare

Retiree

Fixed income, healthcare-sensitive, prefers low cost and stable infrastructure.

Best fit
Austin by 1.1 points
Austin4.7/10
San Francisco3.7/10

Axes scored: healthcare, qualityOfLife, affordability

Cost-conscious mover

Salary stretch matters most. Cuts everything else if it lowers the burn rate.

Best fit
Austin by 2.3 points
Austin2.3/10
San Francisco0.0/10

Axes scored: affordability

Profiles use simple axis averaging — for a deeper read with your own weights, use the per-axis breakdown above.

Going deeper

Visa landscape for both countries — and case studies that touch this corridor.

Tools that work for either choice

Some links below are affiliate links — if you sign up we may earn a small commission, at no extra cost to you.

Methodology

How this page is calculated

Data sources

  • Mundevo per-city dataset. Cost basket, rent index, safety, healthcare, air quality and median internet for both cities. Reference date: 2026-05-28 (Austin) and 2026-05-28 (San Francisco).
  • FX rate. 1 USD = 1.0000 USD, used to normalize cost baskets.
  • CityScoreCalculator. Four axes (Affordability, Quality of life, Remote work, Healthcare) computed with explicit weights and explanations. See per-axis calculation strings rendered on this page.
  • ComparisonService. Per-category cost deltas (housing, food, transport, utilities, leisure, healthcare) normalized to the origin currency.

Update cadence

Data as of . Last reviewed .

Calculation

For each of the four axes we compute an independent 0–10 score using the formulas printed beside each axis. The composite is the unweighted mean of the four axes. The overall winner is the city with the higher composite, unless the margin is under 0.05 points — in which case Austin is shown first as a tiebreaker to keep results stable.

Limitations

  • Climate is not scored — we don't yet hold a maintained climate dataset, so weather-driven preferences are not modeled.
  • Tax differences between cities in the same country are not modeled (Spain and Germany don't have material regional differences for this dataset).
  • Indices are population-level. Personal cost varies with neighborhood, employer benefits and family status.
  • Quality-of-life axis weights (safety 0.4 / healthcare 0.35 / air 0.25) are editorial defaults — readers with strong preferences should re-weight manually.

Frequently asked questions

Austin vs San Francisco: which is cheaper?

Austin is roughly 38% cheaper than San Francisco on the monthly cost basket (housing, food, transport, utilities, healthcare). Austin has cost index 78 vs San Francisco at 120 (both with New York = 100).

Which city has better quality of life?

Austin scores 5.4/10 on the Mundevo composite versus San Francisco at 4.4/10. The composite weights safety (40%), healthcare (35%) and air quality (25%). Austin wins overall by 1.0 points.

Is Austin or San Francisco better for remote work?

Austin has 280 Mbps median internet vs San Francisco at 280 Mbps. The four-axis decision rubric on this page (affordability, quality of life, remote work, healthcare) gives a per-dimension breakdown rather than a single answer.

People also explore