Compare-Cities.com
Compare South San Francisco to Beverly Hills
This post compares South San Francisco, California to Beverly Hills, 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 | South San Francisco (city) | Beverly Hills (city) |
---|---|---|
Population | 67,120 | 34,506 |
Income (median) | $52,696 | $82,377 |
Home Value (median) | $697,400 | $2,000,000+ |
White | 33% | 82% |
Black | 2% | 1% |
Asian | 39% | 9% |
With Kids | 34% | 24% |
Age (median) | 39 | 43 |
Rentals | 38% | 58% |
Questions and Answers:
Q: Which is more populated, South San Francisco or Beverly Hills?
A: South San Francisco has a larger population count than Beverly Hills: 67120 compared with 34506 total people.
Q: Do incomes tend to be higher in South San Francisco or in Beverly Hills?
A: Incomes are on average much lower in South San Francisco.
Q: Are homes more expensive in South San Francisco or Beverly Hills?
A: Homes tend to be much more expensive in South San Francisco.
Q: Which has a higher percentage of housing rental units?
A: Beverly Hills does. The percentage of rentals differs quite a bit: 38% for South San Francisco versus 58% for Beverly Hills.
Somewhat similar in-state cities, towns, and CDPs to South San Francisco may include: Newark, Westminster, and West-Covina.
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