Compare-Cities.com
Compare South San Francisco to Riverbank
This post compares South San Francisco, California to Riverbank, 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) | Riverbank (city) |
|---|---|---|
| Population | 67,120 | 24,047 |
| Income (median) | $52,696 | $42,277 |
| Home Value (median) | $697,400 | $247,200 |
| White | 33% | 79% |
| Black | 2% | 0% |
| Asian | 39% | 4% |
| With Kids | 34% | 46% |
| Age (median) | 39 | 32 |
| Rentals | 38% | 32% |
Questions and Answers:
Q: Which is more populated, South San Francisco or Riverbank?
A: South San Francisco has a larger population count than Riverbank: 67120 compared with 24047 total people.
Q: Do incomes tend to be higher in South San Francisco or in Riverbank?
A: Incomes are on average higher in South San Francisco.
Q: Are homes more expensive in South San Francisco or Riverbank?
A: Homes tend to be much more expensive in South San Francisco.
Q: Which has a higher percentage of housing rental units?
A: South San Francisco does. The percentage of rentals differs quite a bit: 38% for South San Francisco versus 32% for Riverbank.
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