What Is Affordable Rent?

Every worker’s financial situation is different, but a general rule of thumb is that no more than 30% of gross monthly income should be spent on housing.

Although some argue that guideline is outdated, it’s still one of the most common ways to gauge affordability between markets where income and rent prices vary.

In practice, however, very few minimum-wage earners come close to hitting that benchmark.

A single, full-time minimum-wage worker cannot afford to rent a one-bedroom apartment in any of the 50 largest U.S. metros based on the 30% rule.

Most Affordable Cities to Rent

Thanks to a rare combination of relatively low rent and high minimum wages, Missouri tops our ranking for minimum-wage renters, with St. Louis and Kansas City ranking as the two most inexpensive cities.

Fair market rent in St. Louis eats up about 41% of a minimum-wage worker’s gross monthly income. That’s the smallest percentage among all cities studied, but it’s still well above the recommended 30%.

To adhere to that threshold, minimum-wage workers in St. Louis would need to lower their rent costs to $720 a month or increase their earnings to $20.73 an hour — about $6 more than they actually make.

While St. Louis takes the top spot, Kansas City helps cement Missouri’s place as the most affordable state for minimum-wage workers in major cities. Minimum-wage workers in Kansas City also earn $15 an hour but pay slightly more to rent a one-bedroom apartment than in St. Louis.

At $1,197 a month, fair market rent consumes 50% of a minimum-wage worker’s gross monthly income. To keep housing costs to the recommended 30%, those employees would need to earn $24.94 an hour.

Although St. Louis and Kansas City fall short of being truly affordable, they are the only cities — along with Fresno, California — where rent costs 50% or less of the minimum-wage worker’s gross monthly income.

Least Affordable Cities to Rent

None of the 50 most-populous metros is affordable, but minimum-wage workers face particularly dire circumstances in 14 cities where rent costs more than their monthly income.

Full-time minimum-wage employees would need to work roughly 191 hours a week, or nearly 38 hours a day, just to afford fair market rent.

Affordability hardly improves in Dallas, the second most expensive city on our list. In fact, Texas stands out as the least affordable state, with minimum-wage workers having to devote more than 100% of their income to rent in all four major metros: Dallas (142%), Austin (135%), Houston (114%), and San Antonio (101%).

The most expensive cities for minimum-wage renters span the country, but they almost all share a common trait: Workers are paid the federal minimum wage of $7.25 an hour, with the exception of New York, Boston, and San Jose.

That leaves workers struggling to pay rent on a weekly salary of just $290. Over the course of a year, they’ll earn below the federal poverty line for individual workers in 2026.

With income so low, multiple minimum-wage workers would have to pool their earnings to afford a one-bedroom apartment, even in cities considered more affordable.

Four workers making the minimum wage would need to share a one-bedroom apartment to cover fair market rent in 12 of the top 50 U.S. metros, using the 30% rule.

In some metros, not even that would be enough. Five minimum-wage workers would need to share a one-bedroom apartment in these eight cities to afford monthly rent:

1. Atlanta, GA
2. Dallas, TX
3. Raleigh, NC
4. Nashville, TN
5. Austin, TX
6. Charlotte, NC
7. Philadelphia, PA
8. Salt Lake City, UT

Not only is that level of crowding unrealistic, it would violate many state occupancy laws that limit the number of tenants per bedroom.

Higher Minimum Wages Improve Rental Affordability

The cities squeezing minimum-wage workers the hardest aren’t necessarily the ones with the highest rents.

San Antonio, for example, has lower rent than Seattle. But it also has lower wages, putting even modest rent out of reach.

At an hourly rate of $7.25, a one-bedroom apartment that costs $1,177 a month in San Antonio consumes 101% of a minimum-wage worker’s gross monthly income. Meanwhile, monthly rent costs about double in Seattle at $2,146, but it eats up only 63% of a minimum-wage worker’s monthly income when they make $21.30 an hour.

Although that’s not enough to cover notoriously high rent prices in the Emerald City, it appears higher minimum wages generally improve affordability in even the most expensive cities.

In the 36 cities where monthly minimum-wage earnings exceed the cost of rent, 30 of them pay workers more than the federal minimum wage.

Meanwhile, in the 14 cities where rent costs more than monthly minimum-wage earnings, 11 of them pay workers only the federal minimum wage of $7.25 an hour.

Rent Kept Rising. The Federal Minimum Wage Didn’t

Although some cities have increased their lowest wages, the federal minimum wage hasn’t budged since 2009.

To simply maintain the same purchasing power it had 17 years ago, the minimum wage would need to increase to $11.43 an hour — a roughly $4 hike.

Yet only 30 of the top 50 largest metros pay minimum-wage workers more than that amount, and it’s still not enough to affordably rent a one-bedroom apartment using the 30% rule in any city.

Even if every city in the top 50 raised their minimum wage by $10 an hour, renting a one-bedroom apartment would be affordable for minimum-wage workers in only three cities:

1. St. Louis, MO
2. Kansas City, MO
3. Detroit, MI

Twenty-three cities would need to raise their minimum wage by $20 or more for workers to afford the median rent, six cities would need to raise their minimum wage by $30 or more, and two cities would need to raise their minimum wage by $40 or more.

San Jose has the widest gap between the local minimum wage and the required amount to affordably rent a one-bedroom apartment.

Despite earning one of the highest minimum wages at $18.45 an hour, workers still fall $43.68 short of what they’d need for rent. To close the gap, minimum-wage workers would need to make a whopping $62.13 an hour.

After San Jose, nearby San Francisco has the second-largest gap at $42.84, followed by New York ($39.31) and Boston ($36.58).

How Much Can Minimum-Wage Renters Afford?

Among the 50 metros studied, 17 still pay only the federal minimum wage. In those cities, workers can afford to pay just $348 a month to rent a one-bedroom apartment, according to the 30% rule.

That’s several hundred dollars less than rent in even the most affordable markets. Of all cities studied, St. Louis has the cheapest rent, with a one-bedroom apartment costing $995 a month — nearly triple what a federal minimum-wage worker can afford.

Even in Seattle, which boasts the highest minimum wage at $21.30 an hour, employees can only afford to pay $1,022 on rent. Meanwhile, actual rent for a one-bedroom unit costs double that amount at $2,146 a month.

No city has rent prices that minimum-wage workers can afford using the 30% rule, but St. Louis comes the closest. With a minimum wage of $15 an hour, the monthly shortfall between fair market rent ($995) and what minimum-wage employees can actually afford ($720) is just $275.

The gap is widest in San Jose, where fair market rent ($2,982) exceeds the ideal rent for minimum-wage workers ($886) by $2,096.

Calculate Affordable Rent on Your Income

Methodology

Best Interest Financial compared fair market rent figures from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development to research the gap between minimum wage and rent. State minimum wages were sourced from the National Conference of State Legislatures. Cities and counties with local ordinances that place the minimum wage above the state’s minimum wage were sourced from the U.C. Berkeley Labor Center.

More Research From Best Interest Financial

FAQs