Waterloo-Cedar Falls vs Houston-Pasadena-The Woodlands

Cost of living comparison based on BEA Regional Price Parities. Houston-Pasadena-The Woodlands is 13.3% more expensive than Waterloo-Cedar Falls.

What This Comparison Actually Tells You

The Bureau of Economic Analysis indexes Waterloo-Cedar Falls, IA at an overall Regional Price Parity of 87.1 and Houston-Pasadena-The Woodlands, TX at 98.6, using the U.S. national average of 100 as the reference point. That puts Houston-Pasadena-The Woodlands 13.3% more expensive than Waterloo-Cedar Falls on a blended basket of goods, services, and rents. The raw index gap of 11.6 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, Waterloo-Cedar Falls indexes goods at 93.7, services at 83.7, and rents at 63.1, while Houston-Pasadena-The Woodlands comes in at 100.6, 95.3, and 104.5 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 Waterloo-Cedar Falls has the same purchasing power as $113,292 in Houston-Pasadena-The Woodlands based on these indexes. The two metros serve populations of roughly 168,163 (Waterloo-Cedar Falls) and 7,274,714 (Houston-Pasadena-The Woodlands), and median household incomes are $68,916 versus $80,458 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.

Waterloo-Cedar Falls
87.1
Cost Index
Houston-Pasadena-The Woodlands
98.6
Cost Index

Category Breakdown

Category Waterloo-Cedar Falls Houston-Pasadena-The Woodlands Difference
Overall 87.1 98.6 +11.6
Goods 93.7 100.6 +6.9
Services 83.7 95.3 +11.6
Rents 63.1 104.5 +41.4

Visual Comparison

Overall
Waterloo-Cedar Falls
87.1
Houston-Pasadena-The Woodlands
98.6
Goods
Waterloo-Cedar Falls
93.7
Houston-Pasadena-The Woodlands
100.6
Services
Waterloo-Cedar Falls
83.7
Houston-Pasadena-The Woodlands
95.3
Rents
Waterloo-Cedar Falls
63.1
Houston-Pasadena-The Woodlands
104.5

Vertical line = national average (100)

Salary Equivalents

What a salary in Waterloo-Cedar Falls would need to be in Houston-Pasadena-The Woodlands for the same purchasing power:

In Waterloo-Cedar Falls In Houston-Pasadena-The Woodlands Difference
$50,000 $56,646 +$6,646
$75,000 $84,969 +$9,969
$100,000 $113,292 +$13,292
$150,000 $169,939 +$19,939

Use the salary calculator for custom amounts.

Metro Context

Metric Waterloo-Cedar Falls Houston-Pasadena-The Woodlands
Population 168,163 7,274,714
Median Income $68,916 $80,458
Data Year 2024 2024

Frequently Asked Questions

Is Houston-Pasadena-The Woodlands more expensive than Waterloo-Cedar Falls?
Houston-Pasadena-The Woodlands is 13.3% more expensive than Waterloo-Cedar Falls. The overall cost index is 98.6 vs 87.1 (national average = 100).
What salary in Houston-Pasadena-The Woodlands equals $100K in Waterloo-Cedar Falls?
A $100,000 salary in Waterloo-Cedar Falls has the same purchasing power as $113,292 in Houston-Pasadena-The Woodlands. This is based on the BEA Regional Price Parity indexes.
How do rents compare between Waterloo-Cedar Falls and Houston-Pasadena-The Woodlands?
Rents in Waterloo-Cedar Falls are indexed at 63.1 while Houston-Pasadena-The Woodlands is at 104.5 (national average = 100). Houston-Pasadena-The Woodlands has higher rents.

Source: Bureau of Economic Analysis, Regional Price Parities (2024). Index where national average = 100.

Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details. Retrieved and formatted by PlainCost Editorial