Head to head
Indianapolis, IN vs Los Angeles, CA
Indianapolis is cheaper — estimated essentials for a single person run about $2,269/mo less, and living comfortably there takes roughly $52,000 less in annual salary (taxes included).
| Metric | Indianapolis66 | Los Angeles47 |
|---|---|---|
| Est. monthly cost (single) | $3,753 | $6,022 |
| Est. monthly cost (household of 4) | $7,143 | $11,266 |
| Salary for comfort | $70,000/yr | $122,000/yr |
| Typical rent | $1,473 | $2,903 |
| Median home value | $207,000 | $879,500 |
| Median household income | $62,995 | $80,366 |
| Unemployment | 3.3% | 5.3% |
| Housing score | 69 | 2 |
| Jobs score | 74 | 25 |
| Safety score | 23 | 47 |
| Climate score | 89 | 100 |
| Amenities score | 48 | 100 |
| Population | 882K | 3.9M |
| Summer high / winter low | 84° / 19° | 89° / 47° |
Fit scores use the reference profile (single, $6,700/mo gross, default weights). Green marks the better value per row.
Indianapolis, IN
Los Angeles, CA