Compare-Cities.com
Compare Riverbank to South San Francisco
This post compares Riverbank, California to South San Francisco, California across various dimensions, including population, median income, median age, percentage of housing that is rental, percent of households with kids, and other demographics.
| Dimension | Riverbank (city) | South San Francisco (city) |
|---|---|---|
| Population | 24,047 | 67,120 |
| Income (median) | $42,277 | $52,696 |
| Home Value (median) | $247,200 | $697,400 |
| White | 79% | 33% |
| Black | 0% | 2% |
| Asian | 4% | 39% |
| With Kids | 46% | 34% |
| Age (median) | 32 | 39 |
| Rentals | 32% | 38% |
Questions and Answers:
Q: Which is more populated, Riverbank or South San Francisco?
A: Riverbank has a much smaller population count than South San Francisco: 24047 compared with 67120 total people.
Q: Do incomes tend to be higher in Riverbank or in South San Francisco?
A: Incomes are on average lower in Riverbank.
Q: Are homes more expensive in Riverbank or South San Francisco?
A: Homes tend to be much less expensive in Riverbank.
Q: Which has a higher percentage of housing rental units?
A: South San Francisco does. The percentage of rentals differs quite a bit: 32% for Riverbank versus 38% for South San Francisco.
Somewhat similar in-state cities, towns, and CDPs to Riverbank may include: Galt, Visalia, and Reedley.
The statistics and analyses on this page are based on data from the U.S. Census American Community Survey.
City first letter menu:
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z