What the Numbers Actually Show
Migration data has a lag. What we can measure directly is where housing costs have gotten out of control relative to incomes, where job growth has stalled, and where the math of staying simply doesn't work for working households.
The metros below share a pattern: high home values, rents above $1,800-2,400, unemployment either rising or stuck, and population data that shows net domestic outflow in recent years.
California: The Clearest Case
San Francisco-Oakland: Median home value $1,105,100. Median rent $2,397. Unemployment 3.6%. Job growth essentially flat.
A $127,792 median household income is genuinely high, but the problem is the $1,105,100 median home price. That's an 8.6x price-to-income ratio, among the highest in the country. Homeownership for middle-class buyers requires either inheritance or 20 years of disciplined saving. The tech sector still pays exceptionally well, but the companies doing the paying have distributed their workforces. You no longer have to be in the Bay to work for a Bay Area employer.
San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara: Median home value $1,393,400. Median rent $2,773. The tech hub. Also 9.1x income-to-price ratio.
Los Angeles: Median home value $867,200. Median rent $1,993. Job growth is 1.5%, which is better than the Bay Area, but at a 13.3% top state income tax rate and with rent at nearly $2,000, households earning $91,960 are spending most of their take-home.
The question isn't whether California is a good place to live. It clearly is for many people. The question is where people are going when they leave, and the answer is mostly Texas and Florida.
Denver: The Case of Rapid Price Compression
Denver-Aurora: Median home value $611,300. Median rent $1,898. Unemployment 3.2%.
Denver was affordable in 2012. Median home values have increased roughly 150% since then. A city where a median-priced home costs 9x the median household income ($95,363 for the metro) starts losing the people it attracted in the first place. The mountain lifestyle is real. So is the price compression.
Where Are They Going?
The destinations absorbing domestic migrants from these metros tend to share a few traits: no state income tax or low income taxes, home prices below $450,000, and active job markets.
Austin, TX: Rent $1,752 | Home $487,200 | Job growth 2.9% | No income tax. Still expensive relative to Texas standards, but Austin has been absorbing significant tech migration from California. The job market is real: unemployment at 3.5% with active hiring in tech, healthcare, and finance.
Dallas-Fort Worth: Rent $1,638 | Home $373,900 | Job growth 2.2% | No income tax. More affordable than Austin and with a more diversified economy. Finance, healthcare, logistics, and tech are all well-represented.
Tampa-St. Petersburg: Rent $1,729 | Home $372,100 | Job growth 2.4% | No income tax. Tampa's gulf coast location, warm winters, and improving job market have made it one of the more popular relocation destinations from the Northeast.
Nashville, TN: Rent $1,566 | Home $437,200 | No income tax. Nashville's growth has been so strong that it's starting to price out the people who moved there for affordability five years ago. That's a real tension. But relative to San Francisco or Denver, the math still looks different.
The Pattern Worth Noting
What's consistent across the cities people are leaving: income tax rates between 10-13%, home values that have outpaced income growth by large multiples, and in some cases genuine stagnation in job growth numbers.
The places receiving them offer the reverse: no or low income taxes, home prices that still allow ownership on median wages (at least for now), and active hiring markets.
The cities people are leaving aren't broken. They're expensive. The distinction matters.
Explore more: Compare city costs → | No income tax states → | See full data →
See the Data for Your City
MoveMap has real data on 900+ U.S. metros: rent, income, crime, weather, jobs, and more.