Houston-Pasadena-The Woodlands vs Great Falls

What This Comparison Actually Tells You

The Bureau of Economic Analysis indexes Houston-Pasadena-The Woodlands, TX at an overall Regional Price Parity of 98.6 and Great Falls, MT at 96.8, using the U.S. national average of 100 as the reference point. That puts Great Falls 1.8% less expensive than Houston-Pasadena-The Woodlands on a blended basket of goods, services, and rents. The raw index gap of 1.8 points matters more than the headline comparison because it flows directly into salary-equivalent math that families use for relocation, job offers, and remote-work arbitrage decisions.

Inside the breakdown, Houston-Pasadena-The Woodlands indexes goods at 100.6, services at 95.3, and rents at 104.5, while Great Falls comes in at 96.0, 73.0, and 97.1 on the same three categories. The rent line carries the largest weight in the BEA methodology, so a metro with a higher rent index almost always ends up more expensive overall - Houston-Pasadena-The Woodlands carries the heavier rent load here, and that tends to dominate household budget experience on the ground.

In salary terms, a $100,000 income in Houston-Pasadena-The Woodlands has the same purchasing power as $98,191 in Great Falls based on these indexes. The two metros serve populations of roughly 7,274,714 (Houston-Pasadena-The Woodlands) and 84,601 (Great Falls), and median household incomes are $80,458 versus $66,203 respectively - so the right way to read this comparison is never the index alone, but the ratio of your expected local salary to the rent and services mix. For any serious relocation or remote-work decision, pair this BEA comparison with BLS occupation-specific wage data, HUD Fair Market Rent tables, and state tax treatment before committing.