Irvine is Southern California’s top spot for renters and San Bernardino the worst, according to a national ranking of places to be a tenant.
My trusty spreadsheet reviewed a recent rentability scorecard from WalletHub, which graded 182 large U.S. cities – including 20 in Southern California – on their desirability for renters.
The grades were based on two components. What I’ll call “affordability” – 13 benchmarks tracking everything from the price of rents vs. incomes to the tenant-friendliness of local laws. And there’s “livability” – a combination of eight yardsticks of regional quality of life, from schools to safety to weather. Those grades were combined into a national ranking.
Consider Irvine’s No. 1 grade for Southern California.
It was driven by the city scoring second-best for the region’s affordability. Keep in mind, that’s essentially a comparison of citywide high rents to fat local paychecks. Plus, Irvine ranked No. 3 for local livability. And on the national scale, Irvine ranked No. 26 among the 180 U.S. cities.
No. 2 was Huntington Beach, with the fourth-best regional affordability and the No. 1 grade for Southern California livability. Nationally, it was No. 35.
And the region’s third-best city for renters was San Diego – No. 7 in affordability, No. 5 in livability, and No. 63 nationally.
By the way, the Kansas City suburb of Overland Park was scored the best U.S. spot for renters.
Low scores
At the other end of the rentability spectrum, San Bernardino scored the region’s lowest grade for tenants.
That was based on its No. 18 grade for local affordability and No. 20 rank for livability. Nationally, it ranked No. 174. Only eight ranked lower, with Memphis scoring as the nation’s worst place to rent.
The next lowest locally was Moreno Valley, scoring No. 20 for local affordability, No. 13 in Southern California livability, and No. 165 nationally.
No. 18 regionally was Ontario – No. 19 in affordability, No. 10 in livability, and No. 156 nationally.
Same old story
That national scale tells a familiar story about Southern California living. A solid place to live, if you can afford it.
Contemplate that the 20 local cities had an average No. 51 U.S. ranking for livability. That’s significantly better than the typical No. 97 grade for 153 cities tracked that are located outside of California.
However, there’s a price to pay. Southern California’s average affordability rank was a lowly No. 154 compared with No. 82 for renting outside of the Golden State.
That’s why, on this U.S. scale, Southern California averaged an overall No. 112 rank for rentability vs. No. 88 elsewhere.
Other local grades
Here is how the rest of Southern California was graded by WalletHub, in order of desirability – high to low …
No. 4 Garden Grove: No. 10 for regional affordability, No. 2 for livability, and No. 68 on the national scorecard of 182 cities.
No. 5 Santa Clarita: No. 11 affordability, No. 4 livability, and No. 79 nationally.
No. 6 Fontana: No. 5 affordability, No. 8 livability, and No. 80 nationally.
No. 7 Oxnard: No. 3 affordability, No. 17 livability, and No. 100 nationally.
No. 8 Rancho Cucamonga: No. 15 affordability, No. 6 livability, and No. 103 nationally.
No. 9 Bakersfield: No. 1 affordability, No. 19 livability, and No. 109 nationally.
No. 10 Chula Vista: No. 8 affordability, No. 12 livability, and No. 124 nationally.
No. 11 Anaheim: No. 6 affordability, No. 15 livability, and No. 125 nationally.
No. 12 Long Beach: No. 13 affordability, No. 11 livability, and No. 129 nationally.
No. 13 Santa Ana: No. 9 affordability, No. 14 livability, and No. 132 nationally.
No. 14 Glendale: No. 17 affordability, No. 7 livability, and No. 137 nationally.
No. 15 Los Angeles: No. 14 affordability, No. 16 livability, and No. 141 nationally.
No. 16 Oceanside: No. 16 affordability, No. 9 livability, and No. 148 nationally.
No. 17 Riverside: No. 12 affordability, No. 18 livability, and No. 152 nationally.
Jonathan Lansner is the business columnist for the Southern California News Group. He can be reached at jlansner@scng.com
