Head to head
Bakersfield, CA vs Minneapolis, MN
Bakersfield is cheaper — estimated essentials for a single person run about $59/mo less, and living comfortably there takes roughly $2,000 less in annual salary (taxes included).
| Metric | Bakersfield63 | Minneapolis52 |
|---|---|---|
| Est. monthly cost (single) | $4,129 | $4,188 |
| Est. monthly cost (family of 4, incl. childcare) | $10,022 | $10,983 |
| Salary for comfort | $77,000/yr | $79,000/yr |
| Typical rent | $1,483 | $1,709 |
| Median home value | $347,300 | $345,600 |
| Median household income | $77,397 | $80,269 |
| Unemployment | 6.2% | 4.2% |
| Housing score | 65 | 60 |
| Jobs score | 33 | 42 |
| Safety score | 54 | 11 |
| Climate score | 90 | 60 |
| Amenities score | 47 | 64 |
| Population | 408.4K | 426.8K |
| Summer high / winter low | 97° / 39° | 83° / 8° |
Fit scores use the reference profile (single, $6,700/mo gross, default weights). Green marks the better value per row.
Bakersfield, CA
Minneapolis, MN