Head to head
Bakersfield, CA vs Indianapolis, IN
Indianapolis is cheaper — estimated essentials for a single person run about $1,167/mo less, and living comfortably there takes roughly $26,000 less in annual salary (taxes included).
| Metric | Bakersfield57 | Indianapolis66 |
|---|---|---|
| Est. monthly cost (single) | $4,920 | $3,753 |
| Est. monthly cost (household of 4) | $9,823 | $7,143 |
| Salary for comfort | $96,000/yr | $70,000/yr |
| Typical rent | $1,483 | $1,473 |
| Median home value | $347,300 | $207,000 |
| Median household income | $77,397 | $62,995 |
| Unemployment | 5.4% | 3.3% |
| Housing score | 67 | 69 |
| Jobs score | 32 | 74 |
| Safety score | 54 | 23 |
| Climate score | 90 | 89 |
| Amenities score | 47 | 48 |
| Population | 408.4K | 882K |
| Summer high / winter low | 97° / 37° | 84° / 19° |
Fit scores use the reference profile (single, $6,700/mo gross, default weights). Green marks the better value per row.
Bakersfield, CA
Indianapolis, IN