Top Metros for Buyers and Purchasing Agents: New York Leads, Lexington Park Pays Most

Across these ten metros, LaborCove’s data shows distinct trade‑offs between salary levels, employment counts, and overall Geography Scores. Some metros, such as New York–Newark–Jersey City and Los Angeles–Long Beach–Anaheim, pair relatively large employment counts with median salaries close to or moderately above the national benchmark. Others, such as Lexington Park and San Jose–Sunnyvale–Santa Clara, post much higher median pay but have much smaller employment totals. For buyers and purchasing agents thinking about geography, the national occupation picture provides additional context: a national median salary of $77,710, national employment of 491,430, and a projected national employment growth rate of 5.8% for the occupation as a whole. These national figures frame the more detailed metro‑level comparisons below but do not represent metro‑specific projections.

Nationally, buyers and purchasing agents have a median annual salary of $77,710 and employment of 491,430. Against that backdrop, all ten of the top‑ranked metros in this Insight report median salaries above the national median. Among these ten metros, several show median pay that is moderately higher than the national figure. New York–Newark–Jersey City reports a median salary of $83,350, Los Angeles–Long Beach–Anaheim reports $82,500, Dallas–Fort Worth–Arlington reports $79,420, and Chicago–Naperville–Elgin reports $78,510, each above the $77,710 national median. Other metros in the top ten show substantially higher median salaries relative to the national benchmark. Washington–Arlington–Alexandria reports $104,880, San Jose–Sunnyvale–Santa Clara reports $101,500, Seattle–Tacoma–Bellevue reports $95,970, Boston–Cambridge–Newton reports $93,010, San Francisco–Oakland–Fremont reports $93,600, and Lexington Park reports $111,530—all notably higher than the national median of $77,710.

New York–Newark–Jersey City holds the #1 LaborCove rank among metros for buyers and purchasing agents, with a Geography Score of 75.44. It also records the largest listed employment count among these top metros, at 29,360. New York’s median salary of $83,350 is higher than the national median of $77,710 while being lower than the median salary in several lower‑ranked metros such as Washington–Arlington–Alexandria at $104,880 and Lexington Park at $111,530. The New York metro’s Geography Score of 75.44 is higher than the scores reported for all other metros in this top‑ten group, including Washington–Arlington–Alexandria at 64.76 and Los Angeles–Long Beach–Anaheim at 60.47, reflecting its top position in LaborCove’s metro rankings for this occupation.

Washington–Arlington–Alexandria ranks #2 with a Geography Score of 64.76 and a median salary of $104,880 for buyers and purchasing agents. Its employment count of 14,240 is smaller than New York’s 29,360 but larger than the employment reported for San Jose–Sunnyvale–Santa Clara at 3,380 and Lexington Park at 730. Los Angeles–Long Beach–Anaheim is ranked #3 with a Geography Score of 60.47, a median salary of $82,500, and an employment count of 18,270. Within this group, Los Angeles has a larger employment count than Washington–Arlington–Alexandria at 14,240 and Seattle–Tacoma–Bellevue at 9,960. San Jose–Sunnyvale–Santa Clara and Seattle–Tacoma–Bellevue, ranked #4 and #5 with Geography Scores of 57.63 and 57.46 respectively, both report median salaries above $95,000 ($101,500 for San Jose and $95,970 for Seattle) but have smaller employment counts than New York, Los Angeles, Washington, Boston, Dallas–Fort Worth, and Chicago.

Boston–Cambridge–Newton, ranked #6 with a Geography Score of 56.59, has a median salary of $93,010 and employment of 10,090. Its salary is higher than New York’s $83,350, even though Boston’s ranking and Geography Score are lower. San Francisco–Oakland–Fremont ranks #7, with a Geography Score of 54.92, a median salary of $93,600, and employment of 6,300. Its median salary is higher than Los Angeles–Long Beach–Anaheim’s $82,500 and Dallas–Fort Worth–Arlington’s $79,420 while its employment count is smaller than each of those metros. Dallas–Fort Worth–Arlington and Chicago–Naperville–Elgin, ranked #8 and #9 with Geography Scores of 53.16 and 52.48 respectively, both show employment counts above 14,000 (14,160 in Dallas–Fort Worth and 14,260 in Chicago) and median salaries modestly above the $77,710 national figure, at $79,420 and $78,510.

Lexington Park, Maryland, ranks #10 in LaborCove’s top‑ten list for buyers and purchasing agents, with a Geography Score of 52.02. It reports a median salary of $111,530, which is higher than the median reported for any of the other nine metros in this group. Lexington Park’s median salary of $111,530 is higher than Washington–Arlington–Alexandria’s $104,880, San Jose–Sunnyvale–Santa Clara’s $101,500, and San Francisco–Oakland–Fremont’s $93,600, and it is also substantially higher than the national median of $77,710. At the same time, Lexington Park’s employment count of 730 is smaller than the employment counts reported for all other metros in this top‑ten set. For buyers and purchasing agents evaluating these metros together, the LaborCove results illustrate that the highest reported median salary in this group does not correspond to the highest LaborCove rank or the largest employment count, underscoring that Geography Scores synthesize multiple metrics rather than salary alone.

LaborCove’s metro rankings for buyers and purchasing agents are based on authoritative U.S. labor‑market data combined with LaborCove’s Geography Score methodology. Key inputs for this Insight include: - National median annual salary, national employment, and a national projected employment growth rate for buyers and purchasing agents as an occupation. - For each listed metro area: median annual salary, employment, and a LaborCove Geography Score, along with each metro’s overall rank in the LaborCove results. The Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics (OEWS) reference period for the underlying employment and wage observations is May 2025. The 2026 report year is the product/report year for these data, not the observation year. LaborCove’s Geography Score summarizes how each metro compares on the underlying inputs, but the precise contribution of each metric to the score is not disclosed in this evidence. Rankings should therefore be interpreted as a structured comparison tool rather than a prediction of any individual’s likelihood of finding employment. Career decisions should also reflect personal factors that are not captured in this data, such as family considerations and individual role fit.