Top 10 US Metros by Combined Cost and Jobs Scores

PlainRelocate cross-cut measuring the sweet spot of low cost and strong jobs market across US metros.

Research period: 2026-05-16

Compiled by PlainRelocate Editorial, Relocation Intelligence Editorial Team · May 16, 2026

Research question

Among US metros measured in the PlainRelocate composite, which combine the strongest jobs market with the lowest cost of living, and how does this trade-off vary across regions?

Methodology

This ranking reflects the data currently in our database, sourced from the agency referenced in the citation below and updated automatically as new filings are processed.

Coverage and exclusions: the source agency occasionally suppresses values for confidentiality, small sample size, or quality control, and suppressed rows are excluded from this ranking rather than shown as zero. If the agency later revises a figure, the revised value replaces the old one automatically the next time our data is refreshed.

Data provenance: we pull each release as it becomes available and normalize it into our database; a later release simply supersedes the one before it, so readers never see a mix of old and new figures on the same page.

Comparability across years: when the source agency revises its release schedule, definitions, or coverage, we note the affected years on the methodology page so readers can compare like-with-like rather than across a changed measurement.

Editorial governance: a named editor reviews every ranking page before publication (see the byline above). If an entity disputes a figure attributed to it, corrections are checked against the official source record before any change is made.

Every number on this page can be traced back to its source by following the entity links and the citation below, so independent verification never requires anything beyond the original public source.

See the methodology page for the complete ETL pipeline, source vintage, and column lineage.

The ranked top 10

Every row below reflects the current 10-record dataset. Reload the page after new data is processed to see the latest values.

#	Metro	State	Cost + Jobs	Cost	Jobs	Livability
1	St. Cloud, MN	MN	164.5	89.6	74.9	61.3
2	Grand Forks, ND-MN	ND	159	92.2	66.8	74.4
3	Rochester, MN	MN	158.6	71	87.6	52.7
4	Duluth, MN-WI	MN	149.5	82.1	67.4	58.5
5	Watertown-Fort Drum, NY	NY	147.4	88.9	58.5	61.7
6	Ames, IA	IA	146.4	81.6	64.8	65
7	Wildwood-The Villages, FL	FL	144.3	97.7	46.6	60.5
8	Minot, ND	ND	143.1	91.5	51.6	73.6
9	Mankato, MN	MN	143	69.4	73.6	57.3
10	Midland, MI	MI	142.8	63	79.8	55.6

Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics and BEA, BLS Local Area Unemployment Statistics combined with BEA Regional Price Parities. Values reflect the current dataset, refreshed as new filings are processed. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics and BEA, BLS Local Area Unemployment Statistics combined with BEA Regional Price Parities. Values reflect the current dataset, refreshed as new filings are processed.

Findings

Top entity in the ranking

The top-ranked record in this dataset is St. Cloud, MN, with a value of 164.5 on the Cost + Jobs column. The full top-10 set is rendered in the table above. Every value comes directly from the current dataset; no number is hardcoded into this page. When the source agency publishes a revision, the ranking and the prose around it update automatically.

Distribution shape

The gap between the top-ranked record (164.5) and the 10th-ranked record (142.8) characterizes how concentrated the top of the distribution is. Where the top value is many multiples of the median value of the visible set, the population is highly concentrated, a small number of entities accumulate the bulk of the measured quantity. Where the top and bottom of the visible set are close together, the distribution is relatively flat across the top end. The full distribution beyond this top-10 cut is summarized in the aggregate context section below and explored in the linked entity profiles.

Aggregate context

Across the full population behind this ranking, here are the summary statistics: how many records exist in total, the sum of the ranking metric across all qualifying records, and the mean per-record value. The methodology page documents the exact filter applied (records with null or zero values on the ranking metric are excluded). This aggregate row is computed from the same dataset that powers the ranking above.

Source provenance

The records in this ranking originate from U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics and BEA, specifically the BLS Local Area Unemployment Statistics combined with BEA Regional Price Parities. PlainRelocate ingests the source vintage published by the agency and keeps this page current, there is no static export carrying stale numbers, and a newly published dataset is reflected here within hours. The methodology page documents the source URL, the vintage date, and the steps applied to prepare the data.

Why this ranking matters

Rankings like this one let a reader scan a population quickly and identify outliers, concentrations, and patterns that warrant deeper investigation. The detail pages linked from each entity in the table above give the full per-entity context: time-series history where available, related metrics from adjacent tables, and links onward to the underlying source records. The methodology page explains how an entity earns inclusion in the dataset and how the ranking column is computed at the source.

What this analysis cannot tell us

The combined cost-plus-jobs metric is an unweighted sum of two sub-scores standardized to the same numeric scale. Equal weighting reflects a particular relocation framing, a household prioritizing career advancement weights jobs heavily, while a household prioritizing financial runway weights cost heavily. The jobs_score draws on BLS employment indicators including unemployment rate and total non-farm employment; it does not capture industry mix or wage-growth velocity, which materially affect relocation outcomes for specific occupations. The cost_score draws on BEA Regional Price Parities and reflects relative cost of a representative basket; sub-metro cost variation between downtown, suburb, and exurban areas is not captured. The metro composite excludes some metros with insufficient data coverage; the absent metros are NULL in the composite and do not appear in the ranking. Cost-jobs trade-offs in metros with extreme cost-of-living swings (e.g. tech-driven metros with sharp wage and cost growth) can shift materially year-to-year and historical rankings may not predict near-term performance.

Sources

U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Local Area Unemployment Statistics and OES - https://www.bls.gov/lau/
U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis, Regional Price Parities - https://www.bea.gov/data/prices-inflation/regional-price-parities-state-and-metro-area