Every year, thousands of tech workers grind away in San Francisco—saving diligently, renting indefinitely, and hoping that one day they’ll be able to afford a home. But for many, that dream is drifting further out of reach. With median home prices hovering around $1.2 million in the city by the bay, even six-figure earners are finding themselves locked out of the market.
But what if the fastest path to homeownership wasn’t in the San Francisco Bay Area at all?
To test this hypothesis, we looked at the typical income of a high-earning tech worker in San Francisco and Austin, TX, to see who could buy a home in their city faster. We found that a typical San Francisco salary could buy a home in Austin five years sooner than they could in their own city—even after factoring in moving expenses.
For high-earners questioning their future in any city with a high cost of living, this kind of geographic arbitrage might offer the most powerful shortcut to building long-term wealth.
Meet our hypothetical buyers
We modeled the savings journey of two entry-level software engineers: one based in San Francisco, the other in Austin. Both cities have thriving tech sectors, making them realistic launchpads for high-earning professionals and logical options for relocation.
In San Francisco, the median salary for a junior software engineer is approximately $111,000. In Austin, it’s closer to $80,000. We assumed both engineers received annual raises of 3% and were promoted to senior roles in Year 5, bumping their salaries to $197,000 in San Francisco and $145,000 in Austin. From there, we resumed 3% annual raises through the rest of the timeline.
Each worker saved 15% of their take-home pay after taxes. Salaries differ significantly between the two cities, and so do tax rates: Texas has no state income tax, which narrows the savings gap between the two workers to just a few thousand dollars per year, until Year 7, when our San Francisco engineer’s savings overtake Austin’s by over $11,000.
We should note: This model doesn’t account for differences in cost of living, which would likely make it harder to save in San Francisco than in Austin. The cost of living in San Francisco is 73% higher than in Austin, according to NerdWallet’s cost of living comparison calculator. That means our estimates for San Francisco might be somewhat optimistic—if anything, the real-world timeline to buy a home there could be even longer.
How long it takes to buy a home
So, how long does it really take to afford a home in Silicon Valley and the Sun Belt?
In Austin, where the median home price is $600,000, our engineer hit their savings goal in Year 10, with a total of $158,478 set aside—enough to comfortably cover a 20% down payment of $120,000 and $24,000 in closing costs.
In San Francisco, where the median home price is roughly $1.2 million, it took our Bay Area engineer five additional years to reach a similar milestone. They didn’t cross the $288,000 threshold to cover a 20% down payment and 4% closing costs until Year 15, when their cumulative savings hit $304,727.
This five-year difference is striking—especially given that the San Francisco-based engineer was earning a significantly higher salary than our Austin engineer. And because our calculation was based on the percentage of take-home pay, the gap can’t be chalked up to savings habits alone. The cost of housing in San Francisco simply outpaces income, even for high earners.
The relocation math: Factoring in moving costs
Here’s where the numbers get really interesting.
By Year 10, our San Francisco engineer had saved just over $177,000—almost exactly the amount needed to buy a median-priced home in Austin. Even after adding $17,000 for moving expenses, they’d still be ready to buy five years earlier than if they stayed in the Bay Area.
Put simply, the same person, with the same job and same savings rate, could become a homeowner half a decade sooner by migrating to a Sun Belt state.
It’s a powerful reminder that a bigger paycheck doesn’t always translate to faster progress. In some cities, even high earners are running in place.
The salary arbitrage strategy
What our analysis reveals isn’t just a tale of two cities—it’s also a case study in what’s known as salary arbitrage: earning in a high-income market while living (or eventually buying) in a lower-cost one. It’s a strategy that’s increasingly within reach for remote workers, hybrid employees, and those in nationally competitive roles—particularly in tech.
For software engineers in San Francisco and other expensive metros, the takeaway is clear: If your income is decoupled from your location, your housing timeline doesn’t have to be dictated by local home prices. By relocating strategically—even just a few years into your career—you can convert your high earnings into actual equity much faster than if you stay put and try to outsave the market.
Of course, moving isn’t just a financial decision. There are trade-offs to consider: professional networks, personal ties, lifestyle differences, and long-term career goals. But for high earners feeling stuck in place, the numbers offer a compelling incentive to look elsewhere.
