Skip to content

An independent salary reference. Not affiliated with BLS or any U.S. government agency.

Salary data from BLS Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics

Data Scientists Salary: Utah vs Washington

Data Scientists earn a median of $116,420 in Utah and $158,760 in Washington. That is a nominal gap of $42,340 (-26.7%), with Washington paying more before any cost-of-living adjustment.

Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics survey, May 2024 estimates. Cost-of-living adjustment uses BEA Regional Price Parities, most recent release.

$116,420
Utah median
$117,758 after COL
$158,760
Washington median
$148,356 after COL
-26.7%
Nominal gap
Washington leads
-20.6%
Adjusted gap
Washington leads after COL

The story behind the numbers

On raw wages, Washington pays $42,340 more per year than Utah for data scientists, a gap of +26.7%.

After adjusting for cost of living, Washington still comes out ahead, with roughly $30,598 of extra purchasing power (+20.6% real gap). Local prices do not reverse the nominal advantage.

Full breakdown by location

Detailed wage, employment, and cost-of-living figures for data scientists in each location. Click through to the full local salary page for percentiles, outlook, and peer areas.

Data Scientists

Utah

Median salary
$116,420
Mean salary
$119,640
Employment
4,830
Location quotient
1.87
Jobs per 1,000
2.8
COL-adjusted median
$117,758
Regional Price Parity
98.9%

Exact state RPP match.

Full Data Scientists page for Utah →

Data Scientists

Washington

Median salary
$158,760
Mean salary
$162,730
Employment
7,930
Location quotient
1.48
Jobs per 1,000
2.2
COL-adjusted median
$148,356
Regional Price Parity
107.0%

Exact state RPP match.

Full Data Scientists page for Washington →

Related pages

Keep digging into data scientists from a different angle.

Common questions about this comparison

What does the cost-of-living adjustment actually do? +

It divides each location's nominal median wage by its Regional Price Parity (RPP), which measures how local prices compare to the national average (100 = national). A wage of $100,000 in an area with RPP 120 has the same purchasing power as roughly $83,000 nationally.

Why would the nominal and adjusted winners disagree? +

High-cost metros often pay higher salaries, but not by enough to fully offset the higher cost of housing, goods, and services. When that happens, the location with the lower nominal wage actually offers more real purchasing power.

What is a location quotient? +

The location quotient measures how concentrated an occupation is in a given area versus the national average. A value of 2.0 means the occupation is twice as common there as nationally. It is a signal of what a state specializes in.