Top Metros for Architectural & Engineering Managers: California Hubs Lead, but Pay and Scale Don’t Always Align

Across the top-ranked metros, LaborCove’s data shows substantial variation in how salary levels, employment size, and Geography Scores combine for architectural and engineering managers. Some metros stand out most for pay, others for larger employment counts, and some for their overall Geography Scores relative to peers and to national context. Nationally, the occupation’s median salary and projected growth rate provide a backdrop for interpreting these local results, but each metro’s ranking ultimately reflects its own mix of salary, employment, and Geography Score rather than a single dominant factor.

For architectural and engineering managers nationwide, LaborCove reports a median annual salary of $171,270 and total employment of 220,260. National projected employment growth for this occupation is 3.8%, which applies to the occupation at the national level rather than to particular metros. The national median provides a useful reference point when reviewing metro-level pay. Several of the top LaborCove metros report median salaries above the national figure, while some sit closer to it. National employment totals and the projected growth rate offer context for the overall scale and outlook of the occupation, but the metro rankings themselves are based on the specific salary, employment, and Geography Score values observed in each local market.

San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara, CA holds LaborCove’s #1 metro rank for architectural and engineering managers, with a median annual salary of $234,590, employment of 5,130, and a Geography Score of 74.78. Its median salary is higher than the national median of $171,270. Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim, CA ranks #2 with a median salary of $190,900, employment of 9,570, and a Geography Score of 73.58. Within the top ten, Los Angeles has a larger employment count than any of the other listed metros. Its median salary is also above the national median. San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont, CA comes in at #3, with a median salary of $221,580, employment of 5,000, and a Geography Score of 68.87. Its median salary is higher than the national median and higher than Los Angeles’s median salary, even though San Francisco ranks below Los Angeles in the LaborCove metro results. This illustrates that a higher salary does not necessarily correspond to a higher LaborCove rank when compared among metros that also differ in employment and Geography Scores.

New York-Newark-Jersey City, NY-NJ holds the #4 rank, with a median annual salary of $183,890, employment of 7,580, and a Geography Score of 68.74. Its median salary is higher than the national median of $171,270. New York’s employment count is also larger than that of San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara and San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont. Boston-Cambridge-Newton, MA-NH ranks #5, reporting a median salary of $205,130, employment of 6,690, and a Geography Score of 67.97. Boston’s median salary exceeds the national median and is also higher than New York’s median salary, even though Boston ranks just below New York in LaborCove’s metro list. Together, New York and Boston show how two East Coast metros with median salaries above the national level can differ in both employment counts and overall Geography Scores while sitting adjacent in the rankings.

Detroit-Warren-Dearborn, MI holds the #6 rank with a median salary of $168,550, employment of 9,260, and a Geography Score of 62.03. Among the top ten metros listed, Detroit’s employment count is second only to Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim’s 9,570. Detroit’s median salary is slightly below the national median of $171,270. Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue, WA ranks #7, with a median salary of $204,340, employment of 4,390, and a Geography Score of 60.20. Seattle’s median salary is higher than the national median and higher than Detroit’s median salary, while its employment count is smaller than Detroit’s. Washington-Arlington-Alexandria, DC-VA-MD-WV appears at #8, with a median salary of $185,220, employment of 5,500, and a Geography Score of 57.60. Its median salary is higher than the national median and higher than Detroit’s median salary. San Diego-Chula Vista-Carlsbad, CA ranks #9 with a median salary of $202,810, employment of 3,270, and a Geography Score of 55.85. San Diego’s median salary is higher than the national median and higher than Detroit’s and Washington’s median salaries, yet it ranks below both in the LaborCove order.

Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington, TX rounds out the top ten at #10, with a median annual salary of $172,160, employment of 5,970, and a Geography Score of 55.68. Dallas-Fort Worth’s median salary is slightly above the national median of $171,270. Within this top-ten set, Dallas-Fort Worth’s median salary is lower than the median salaries reported for San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara, Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim, San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont, New York-Newark-Jersey City, Boston-Cambridge-Newton, Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue, Washington-Arlington-Alexandria, and San Diego-Chula Vista-Carlsbad. At the same time, Dallas-Fort Worth’s employment count of 5,970 is higher than the employment counts reported for San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara, San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont, Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue, Washington-Arlington-Alexandria, and San Diego-Chula Vista-Carlsbad. These comparisons highlight that Dallas-Fort Worth’s #10 ranking reflects a particular combination of salary, employment, and Geography Score within the top-ten group, rather than leading on any single metric such as the highest pay or largest employment count among the listed metros.

LaborCove builds metro rankings for architectural and engineering managers by combining authoritative labor-market data with its proprietary LaborCove Geography Score. For this article, we use the national median annual salary, national employment count, and a national projected employment growth rate for the occupation as contextual benchmarks. At the metro level, we rely on each area’s median annual salary, employment count, and LaborCove Geography Score, along with its ranking among 333 available geographies. All occupational employment and wage data used in this analysis are based on observations from the U.S. Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics (OEWS) program with a reference period of May 2025. The 2026 report year reflects when the data are organized and published within LaborCove, not the underlying observation date. The separate national projected employment growth rate is a national-level projection for this occupation and is not a forecast for any specific state or metro. Because individual priorities vary, these rankings should be viewed as one input into career and relocation decisions. LaborCove’s scores summarize relative performance on the included metrics but do not represent predictions about individual job outcomes or guarantees about future conditions in any metro.