Head to head
Omaha, NE vs Tucson, AZ
Tucson is cheaper — estimated essentials for a single person run about $39/mo less, and living comfortably there takes roughly $2,500 less in annual salary (taxes included).
It flips for a family. For a household of four, Omaha is the cheaper of the two — rent scales to household size using each city's own bedroom spread, and that spread is far steeper in some markets than others.
| Metric | Omaha78 | Tucson67 |
|---|---|---|
| Est. monthly cost (single) | $3,620 | $3,581 |
| Est. monthly cost (household of 4) | $6,848 | $7,069 |
| Salary for comfort | $65,500/yr | $63,000/yr |
| Typical rent | $1,368 | $1,402 |
| Median home value | $230,100 | $242,200 |
| Median household income | $72,708 | $54,546 |
| Unemployment | 2.9% | 4.8% |
| Housing score | 88 | 46 |
| Jobs score | 89 | 12 |
| Safety score | 61 | 91 |
| Climate score | 84 | 86 |
| Amenities score | 44 | 58 |
| Population | 488.2K | 543.3K |
| Summer high / winter low | 87° / 14° | 99° / 42° |
Fit scores use the reference profile (single, $6,700/mo gross, default weights). Green marks the better value per row.
Omaha, NE
Tucson, AZ