Salary comparison
Financial Managers: Boulder vs San Francisco
San Francisco, CA pays about 12.0% more for financial managers on paper — $216,150 vs $192,970. But once you factor in what it costs to live there, San Francisco comes out ahead by $23,180 a year in real buying power.
Boulder, CO
$192,970
$142,610
$270,560
$92.77
100
$192,970/yr
Median adjusted for local cost of living.
San Francisco, CA
$216,150
$166,790
$314,940
$103.92
100
$216,150/yr
Median adjusted for local cost of living.
What the numbers mean in practice
The headline gap is $23,180 a year (12.0%) in favor of San Francisco. That is the raw salary difference before any living costs.
Boulder runs a cost index of 100 against the national baseline of 100; San Francisco sits at 100. After adjusting the median for those costs, San Francisco is the better deal by $23,180 a year — that is what each paycheck actually buys locally.
If you are weighing a move from Boulder to San Francisco for this role, the raise needs to beat 12.0% to come out ahead after living costs. Anything below that and you are earning more on paper but keeping less.
Common questions
Where do financial managers earn more, Boulder or San Francisco?
San Francisco pays $216,150 on median — about 12.0% more than Boulder ($192,970). Based on BLS Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics.
Which city is the better deal after living costs?
San Francisco. Once you divide each median by the local cost index, San Francisco gives you roughly$216,150 of real buying power versus $192,970 in the other city.