Overall
- Binghamton
- 92.9
- Utica-Rome
- 92.7
Diff -0.2 RPP
Cost of living comparison based on BEA Regional Price Parities. Utica-Rome is 0.2% less expensive than Binghamton.
Utica-Rome, NY is 0.2% less expensive than Binghamton, NY on BEA Regional Price Parities (overall RPP 92.7 vs 92.9). A $100,000 salary in Binghamton buys about the same as $99,801 in Utica-Rome; the largest component gap is rents.
RPP parity plate
Pair NY:NY 92.9→92.7
PHOTO-FINISH · SAME-STATE · SPLIT-BUDGET · BOTH-BELOW · PP-PAR
Instrument codes from this pair's BEA Regional Price Parities (overall · goods · services · rents · national benchmark 100 · purchasing-power conversion), not a ranking or recommendation.
Binghamton, NY and Utica-Rome, NY are a photo finish on overall price level, only 0.2 RPP points apart. A salary conversion is therefore a fine adjustment, not evidence of a fundamentally different cost regime.
Rents creates the largest separation: Utica-Rome is 3.6 points lower. But services and goods move against the overall direction, so this is a split budget rather than a clean across-the-board winner.
Comparable population context is incomplete for this pair, so no market-scale explanation is inferred from the price indexes.
Both metros remain below the U.S. benchmark of 100. This comparison chooses between two below-average price levels; “more expensive” here does not mean nationally expensive.
For a housing-sensitive move, validate the rent gap first: HUD Fair Market Rent and the actual unit size can overturn what the blended index implies. On the BEA ratio alone, $100,000 in Binghamton corresponds to $99,801 in Utica-Rome.
Diff -0.2 RPP
Diff 0.0 RPP
Diff +0.3 RPP
Diff -3.6 RPP
| Category | Binghamton | Utica-Rome | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 92.9 | 92.7 | -0.2 |
| Goods | 99.7 | 99.7 | 0.0 |
| Services | 131.6 | 131.9 | +0.3 |
| Rents | 69.7 | 66.1 | -3.6 |
Vertical line = national average (100)
Binghamton and Utica-Rome share 17 published annual releases from 2008 through 2024. Their overall gap narrowed, moving from 1.3 to 0.2 RPP points. Binghamton remained the higher-index metro in the latest release.
Services changed the most within this pair: its gap moved 1.6 points between the first and latest shared releases (2.0 to 0.3 points). This describes a relative price-index history, not a forecast or a household budget.
| Release Year | Binghamton RPP | Utica-Rome RPP | Relative Gap |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2008 | 97.0 | 95.7 | 1.3 points Binghamton higher |
| 2012 | 94.9 | 93.5 | 1.4 points Binghamton higher |
| 2016 | 96.1 | 95.3 | 0.8 points Binghamton higher |
| 2020 | 96.9 | 93.4 | 3.5 points Binghamton higher |
| 2024 | 92.9 | 92.7 | 0.2 points Binghamton higher |
Annual BEA Regional Price Parity releases; a higher index means a higher price level relative to the national average of 100. Selected years shown from the full shared series.
What a salary in Binghamton would need to be in Utica-Rome for the same purchasing power:
| In Binghamton | In Utica-Rome | Difference |
|---|---|---|
| $50,000 | $49,900 | $-100 |
| $75,000 | $74,851 | $-149 |
| $100,000 | $99,801 | $-199 |
| $150,000 | $149,701 | $-299 |
Same BEA Regional Price Parity ratio as the table above (92.9 → 92.7), computed live from your number, nothing is sent anywhere.
Utica-Rome is 0.2% less expensive than Binghamton. The overall cost index is 92.7 vs 92.9 (national average = 100).
A $100,000 salary in Binghamton has the same purchasing power as $99,801 in Utica-Rome. This is based on the BEA Regional Price Parity indexes.
Rents in Binghamton are indexed at 69.7 while Utica-Rome is at 66.1 (national average = 100). Binghamton has higher rents.
Every figure on PlainCost is rendered directly from BEA Regional Price Parity source data, no number is typed in by an editor. See our editorial standards & corrections policy, the methodology behind these numbers, our changelog, or report a data error. Data current as of 2026-08-11. Rankings measure the published cost-of-living index only; we don't recommend where to live or rate any metro's quality of life.