Compare-Cities.com
Compare South San Francisco to San Bruno
This post compares South San Francisco, California to San Bruno, 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) | San Bruno (city) |
|---|---|---|
| Population | 67,120 | 43,105 |
| Income (median) | $52,696 | $61,645 |
| Home Value (median) | $697,400 | $754,700 |
| White | 33% | 49% |
| Black | 2% | 1% |
| Asian | 39% | 28% |
| With Kids | 34% | 30% |
| Age (median) | 39 | 39 |
| Rentals | 38% | 44% |
Questions and Answers:
Q: Which is more populated, South San Francisco or San Bruno?
A: South San Francisco has a larger population count than San Bruno: 67120 compared with 43105 total people.
Q: Do incomes tend to be higher in South San Francisco or in San Bruno?
A: Incomes are on average lower in South San Francisco.
Q: Are homes more expensive in South San Francisco or San Bruno?
A: Homes tend to be similarly priced in South San Francisco.
Q: Which has a higher percentage of housing rental units?
A: San Bruno does. The percentage of rentals is quite similar: 38% for South San Francisco versus 44% for San Bruno.
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