Best States for Budget Analysts: California Tops a Tight National Field

Across states, the data shows that higher median salaries do not automatically translate into higher overall rankings. For example, Virginia and Maryland both have higher median salaries than California but rank behind California in LaborCove’s results. Employment counts also vary: some states rank highly with smaller numbers of employed budget analysts compared with larger markets that still place in the top 10. National projected employment growth for budget analysts is 1.0%. This national projection provides context for comparing locations but does not describe growth expectations for any individual state. Instead, the state results focus on current median salaries, employment counts, and LaborCove Geography Scores to highlight differences among the leading markets.

LaborCove’s national data shows a median annual salary of $91,640 for budget analysts and total national employment of 47,160 roles. These figures provide a benchmark for assessing how individual states compare on both pay and employment. National projected employment growth for budget analysts is 1.0%. This projection is national-only and does not indicate how employment will change in any particular state. The state results below instead focus on current salaries, employment counts, and Geography Scores to compare how different locations currently look in the LaborCove dataset.

California ranks #1 in LaborCove’s state results for budget analysts with a Geography Score of 80.83. Its median salary of $99,520 is above the national median of $91,640, and its employment count of 4,160 is the largest among the top states listed. Compared with other top-ranked states, California combines a relatively high median salary with the largest reported employment. For instance, its employment count of 4,160 exceeds Virginia’s 2,730, Maryland’s 2,490, and New York’s 2,760, while also being higher than Texas’s 3,340 and Florida’s 3,150 within the top 10.

Virginia and Maryland both offer higher median salaries than California but rank lower overall in LaborCove’s Geography Scores. Virginia ranks #2 with a median salary of $105,470 and a Geography Score of 72.29, while Maryland ranks #3 with a median salary of $106,020 and a Geography Score of 72.05. Both salaries are above California’s $99,520 median and the national median of $91,640. In employment terms, Virginia’s 2,730 and Maryland’s 2,490 positions are smaller counts than California’s 4,160. New York, ranked #4, has a slightly larger employment count than Virginia and Maryland at 2,760 but a lower median salary of $88,540, which is below the national median. Washington and Colorado also have median salaries higher than California’s. Washington, ranked #5 with a Geography Score of 55.74, has a median salary of $96,640 and employment of 1,510, while Colorado, ranked #7 with a Geography Score of 54.48, has a median salary of $97,100 and employment of 1,290. Both states have smaller employment counts than California alongside Geography Scores below California’s.

Several top-10 states have median salaries near or above the national median of $91,640 while differing in employment counts. Georgia, ranked #8 with a Geography Score of 51.29, has a median salary of $91,870, slightly above the national figure, and employment of 1,900. Massachusetts, ranked #9 with a Geography Score of 51.20, reports a median salary of $92,260 and employment of 1,280. New York and Texas illustrate how salaries can vary on either side of the national benchmark. New York, ranked #4, has a median salary of $88,540, which is below the national median, and employment of 2,760. Texas, ranked #6 with a Geography Score of 54.89, has a median salary of $82,970, also below the national median, but a higher employment count of 3,340 than New York’s 2,760 within the top-10 group. Florida, ranked #10 with a Geography Score of 51.08, reports a median salary of $84,170 and employment of 3,150. Florida’s median salary is below the national figure but its employment count is larger than those of Georgia and Massachusetts within the top 10.

LaborCove’s Geography Scores highlight differences among the top states that are not explained by salary or employment alone. California ranks #1 with a Geography Score of 80.83, ahead of Virginia at 72.29 and Maryland at 72.05, even though California’s median salary is lower than both states. New York, with a Geography Score of 58.23, ranks #4 despite a median salary below the national benchmark. Within the rest of the top 10, Geography Scores are more tightly grouped. Washington (55.74), Texas (54.89), and Colorado (54.48) occupy ranks #5 through #7, followed by Georgia (51.29), Massachusetts (51.20), and Florida (51.08). These small differences in scores show that the lower half of the top 10 is relatively close in LaborCove’s scoring, even as their salaries and employment counts differ.

LaborCove builds these rankings from authoritative labor-market data combined with its proprietary LaborCove Geography Score. For budget analysts (occupation code 13-2031), national figures and state metrics are drawn from Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics (OEWS) with a reference period of May 2025 for wages and employment. The national projected employment growth rate of 1.0% for budget analysts is a separate nationwide projection and is not an OEWS observation or a forecast for any specific state. Each state’s LaborCove Geography Score reflects how that location performs in LaborCove’s model relative to other states in the dataset. The score incorporates the supplied metrics but does not reveal how much each factor contributes. Rankings and scores are best interpreted alongside individual career priorities such as preferred regions, sectors, or non-work factors that are outside the scope of this dataset.