Global CityIntelligence

Ranking

Affordability Balance Ranking

A practical affordability ranking that weighs housing pressure against transport access, services, and opportunity density. Affordability Balance Ranking compares 4444 indexed cities.

Last updated
2026-05-16
Data year
2025
Cities ranked
4444
Ranking type
Affordability Balance

Visual summary

Lightweight visual summary of the top entries in this ranking. The full table below stays the source of truth and links into every city profile.

Visual summary of Affordability Balance Ranking

Visual summary

Affordability Balance

Directional ranking context based on the platform's structured indicators. Not an official government ranking. The ranking table below is the source of truth.

  1. #179/100
  2. #278/100
  3. #378/100
  4. #478/100
  5. #577/100
  6. #677/100
  7. #777/100
  8. #877/100
  9. #977/100
  10. #1077/100

Visual summary shows the top 10 of 4444 cities. See the full ranking table below for every entry.

Ranking table

Ranking rows link directly to city profile pages, keeping comparisons useful for users and crawlable for search engines.

Affordability Balance Ranking table
RankCityScoreWhy it ranks here
#1ViennaAustria79/100Affordability 72/100 with overall context 89/100.
#2KigaliRwanda78/100Affordability 80/100 with overall context 74/100.
#3KyotoJapan78/100Affordability 72/100 with overall context 86/100.
#4Cluj-NapocaRomania78/100Affordability 80/100 with overall context 74/100.
#5BangkokThailand77/100Affordability 78/100 with overall context 76/100.
#6Mexico CityMexico77/100Affordability 78/100 with overall context 75/100.
#7PragueCzechia77/100Affordability 74/100 with overall context 81/100.
#8BogotáColombia77/100Affordability 80/100 with overall context 72/100.
#9Kuala LumpurMalaysia77/100Affordability 78/100 with overall context 76/100.
#10BrnoCzechia77/100Affordability 78/100 with overall context 76/100.
#11ŁódźPoland77/100Affordability 80/100 with overall context 72/100.
#12Quebec CityCanada77/100Affordability 76/100 with overall context 78/100.
#13HalleGermany76/100Affordability 80/100 with overall context 69/100.
#14ChemnitzGermany76/100Affordability 80/100 with overall context 69/100.
#15CopenhagenDenmark76/100Affordability 66/100 with overall context 91/100.
#16TokyoJapan76/100Affordability 68/100 with overall context 89/100.
#17BerlinGermany76/100Affordability 70/100 with overall context 84/100.
#18NairobiKenya76/100Affordability 80/100 with overall context 70/100.
#19MadridSpain76/100Affordability 72/100 with overall context 83/100.
#20WarsawPoland76/100Affordability 74/100 with overall context 79/100.
#21Buenos AiresArgentina76/100Affordability 76/100 with overall context 76/100.
#22TaipeiTaiwan76/100Affordability 70/100 with overall context 84/100.
#23JakartaIndonesia76/100Affordability 80/100 with overall context 70/100.
#24OsakaJapan76/100Affordability 70/100 with overall context 84/100.
#25Ho Chi Minh CityVietnam76/100Affordability 80/100 with overall context 70/100.
#26HanoiVietnam76/100Affordability 82/100 with overall context 68/100.
#27QuitoEcuador76/100Affordability 80/100 with overall context 70/100.
#28BudapestHungary76/100Affordability 78/100 with overall context 73/100.
#29BucharestRomania76/100Affordability 80/100 with overall context 70/100.
#30FukuokaJapan76/100Affordability 74/100 with overall context 78/100.
#31Chiang MaiThailand76/100Affordability 80/100 with overall context 70/100.
#32PortoPortugal76/100Affordability 74/100 with overall context 79/100.
#33KrakowPoland76/100Affordability 76/100 with overall context 77/100.
#34UtrechtNetherlands76/100Affordability 70/100 with overall context 84/100.
#35OttawaCanada76/100Affordability 72/100 with overall context 81/100.
#36GuadalajaraMexico76/100Affordability 76/100 with overall context 75/100.
#37SapporoJapan76/100Affordability 74/100 with overall context 79/100.
#38DaeguSouth Korea76/100Affordability 76/100 with overall context 77/100.
#39IncheonSouth Korea76/100Affordability 74/100 with overall context 80/100.
#40KaohsiungTaiwan76/100Affordability 76/100 with overall context 76/100.
#41Da NangVietnam76/100Affordability 78/100 with overall context 73/100.
#42LeipzigGermany76/100Affordability 76/100 with overall context 76/100.
#43DresdenGermany76/100Affordability 76/100 with overall context 75/100.
#44PoznańPoland76/100Affordability 78/100 with overall context 74/100.
#45WinnipegCanada76/100Affordability 78/100 with overall context 72/100.
#46WałbrzychPoland75/100Affordability 81/100 with overall context 65/100.
#47KaliszPoland75/100Affordability 80/100 with overall context 67/100.
#48LegnicaPoland75/100Affordability 80/100 with overall context 67/100.
#49RadomPoland75/100Affordability 80/100 with overall context 68/100.
#50Bielsko-BiałaPoland75/100Affordability 78/100 with overall context 70/100.
#51ZabrzePoland75/100Affordability 80/100 with overall context 67/100.
#52BytomPoland75/100Affordability 81/100 with overall context 65/100.
#53Ruda ŚląskaPoland75/100Affordability 81/100 with overall context 65/100.
#54TychyPoland75/100Affordability 79/100 with overall context 68/100.
#55MagdeburgGermany75/100Affordability 78/100 with overall context 70/100.
#56KielcePoland75/100Affordability 79/100 with overall context 70/100.
#57OpolePoland75/100Affordability 78/100 with overall context 71/100.
#58SosnowiecPoland75/100Affordability 80/100 with overall context 68/100.
#59GliwicePoland75/100Affordability 78/100 with overall context 70/100.
#60CzęstochowaPoland75/100Affordability 80/100 with overall context 68/100.
#61OsijekCroatia75/100Affordability 80/100 with overall context 67/100.
#62São PauloBrazil75/100Affordability 74/100 with overall context 76/100.
#63Cape TownSouth Africa75/100Affordability 76/100 with overall context 74/100.
#64LisbonPortugal75/100Affordability 70/100 with overall context 82/100.
#65LimaPeru75/100Affordability 78/100 with overall context 70/100.
#66ManilaPhilippines75/100Affordability 78/100 with overall context 70/100.
#67MumbaiIndia75/100Affordability 78/100 with overall context 70/100.
#68CasablancaMorocco75/100Affordability 78/100 with overall context 70/100.
#69Addis AbabaEthiopia75/100Affordability 82/100 with overall context 64/100.
#70MontevideoUruguay75/100Affordability 72/100 with overall context 80/100.
#71BelgradeSerbia75/100Affordability 80/100 with overall context 68/100.
#72VilniusLithuania75/100Affordability 76/100 with overall context 74/100.
#73MedellínColombia75/100Affordability 78/100 with overall context 70/100.
#74BilbaoSpain75/100Affordability 72/100 with overall context 79/100.
#75GdanskPoland75/100Affordability 74/100 with overall context 76/100.
#76WroclawPoland75/100Affordability 74/100 with overall context 77/100.
#77RotterdamNetherlands75/100Affordability 70/100 with overall context 82/100.
#78NagoyaJapan75/100Affordability 70/100 with overall context 82/100.
#79MalagaSpain75/100Affordability 74/100 with overall context 76/100.
#80ZaragozaSpain75/100Affordability 76/100 with overall context 74/100.
#81GranadaSpain75/100Affordability 76/100 with overall context 74/100.
#82TampereFinland75/100Affordability 72/100 with overall context 80/100.
#83PittsburghUnited States75/100Affordability 76/100 with overall context 74/100.
#84MadisonUnited States75/100Affordability 74/100 with overall context 76/100.
#85BrașovRomania75/100Affordability 78/100 with overall context 70/100.
#86PlovdivBulgaria75/100Affordability 80/100 with overall context 68/100.
#87IndianapolisUnited States75/100Affordability 77/100 with overall context 71/100.
#88St. LouisUnited States75/100Affordability 78/100 with overall context 70/100.
#89Kansas CityUnited States75/100Affordability 78/100 with overall context 71/100.
#90San AntonioUnited States75/100Affordability 77/100 with overall context 71/100.
#91CincinnatiUnited States75/100Affordability 77/100 with overall context 71/100.
#92BourgesFrance74/100Affordability 80/100 with overall context 66/100.
#93NiortFrance74/100Affordability 78/100 with overall context 67/100.
#94Saint-QuentinFrance74/100Affordability 82/100 with overall context 62/100.
#95MontbéliardFrance74/100Affordability 80/100 with overall context 64/100.
#96Dąbrowa GórniczaPoland74/100Affordability 80/100 with overall context 66/100.
#97ElblągPoland74/100Affordability 79/100 with overall context 67/100.
#98PłockPoland74/100Affordability 78/100 with overall context 67/100.
#99KoszalinPoland74/100Affordability 78/100 with overall context 68/100.
#100TarnówPoland74/100Affordability 79/100 with overall context 67/100.

Full ranked list (1014444)

Methodology and interpretation

Affordability balance scores visible costs and hidden offsets, including transit access, service quality, and household resilience. Affordability Balance Ranking compares 4444 indexed cities, with Vienna at the top of the table at 79/100. Each row links directly to the relevant city profile so users can step from comparison into module-level context. Data year 2025; last updated 2026-05-16. Drawn from 3 institutional references.

Rankings are directional intelligence, not official government scores. Each entry links to a city profile where users can inspect module-level context, source blocks, and data tables. See the read the scoring methodology for the underlying scoring model.

Structured indicators on this page are directional and intended for orientation. Verified datasets are being integrated; official sources should be used for critical decisions.

Sources

3 institutional references inform this view, listed below with reliability notes. Structured indicators on this page are directional and intended for orientation; verified datasets are being integrated and official sources should be used for critical decisions.