Head to head
Bakersfield, CA vs Saint Paul, MN
Saint Paul is cheaper — estimated essentials for a single person run about $295/mo less, and living comfortably there takes roughly $6,000 less in annual salary (taxes included).
It flips for a family. For two adults with a pre-schooler and a school-age child, Bakersfield is the cheaper of the two — rent scales to household size using each city's own bedroom spread, and childcare varies even more sharply between cities than rent does.
| Metric | Bakersfield63 | Saint Paul61 |
|---|---|---|
| Est. monthly cost (single) | $4,129 | $3,834 |
| Est. monthly cost (family of 4, incl. childcare) | $10,022 | $10,204 |
| Salary for comfort | $77,000/yr | $71,000/yr |
| Typical rent | $1,483 | $1,248 |
| Median home value | $347,300 | $280,300 |
| Median household income | $77,397 | $73,055 |
| Unemployment | 6.2% | 4.4% |
| Housing score | 65 | 77 |
| Jobs score | 33 | 37 |
| Safety score | 54 | 48 |
| Climate score | 90 | 61 |
| Amenities score | 47 | 47 |
| Population | 408.4K | 307.8K |
| Summer high / winter low | 97° / 39° | 83° / 9° |
Fit scores use the reference profile (single, $6,700/mo gross, default weights). Green marks the better value per row.
Bakersfield, CA
Saint Paul, MN