Kimberly, WI vs Marshfield, WI

There is a significant gap in the cost of living between these two cities. Marshfield is 15.9% cheaper than Kimberly. With a cost index of 70 vs 81, the difference would have a meaningful impact on a household's monthly budget. Someone relocating from Marshfield to Kimberly should plan for substantially higher expenses across most categories.

On the housing front, median rent in Kimberly is $1,056/month compared to $798/month in Marshfield — a 32% difference. Home values follow the same pattern: Marshfield is more affordable at $169,900 median vs $196,900.

Median household income in Kimberly is $68,295 compared to $59,294 in Marshfield (+15.2%). The higher salaries in Kimberly partially offset the cost difference, but don't fully close the gap. Looking at affordability, residents of Kimberly spend roughly 18.6% of their income on rent, more than the 16.2% in Marshfield.