Skip to content
uswages .org

Life Scientists, All Other Salary: Massachusetts vs Alabama

Life Scientists, All Other earn a median of $125,260 in Massachusetts and $110,560 in Alabama. That is a nominal gap of $14,700 (+13.3%), with Massachusetts paying more before any cost-of-living adjustment.

Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics survey, May 2025 estimates. Cost-of-living adjustment uses BEA Regional Price Parities, most recent release.

$125,260
Massachusetts median
$118,441 after COL
$110,560
Alabama median
$124,472 after COL
+13.3%
Nominal gap
Massachusetts leads
-4.8%
Adjusted gap
Alabama leads after COL

The story behind the numbers

On raw wages, Massachusetts pays $14,700 more per year than Alabama for life scientists, all other, a gap of +13.3%.

After adjusting for cost of living, the picture flips. Alabama actually offers more purchasing power, effectively paying $6,031 more in national-price-level terms (a +4.8% real gap). The higher nominal wage in the other location is eaten up by higher local prices.

Full breakdown by location

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

Life Scientists, All Other

Massachusetts

Median salary
$125,260
Mean salary
$131,800
Employment
100
Location quotient
0.55
Jobs per 1,000
0.0
COL-adjusted median
$118,441
Regional Price Parity
105.8%

Exact state RPP match.

Full Life Scientists, All Other page for Massachusetts →

Life Scientists, All Other

Alabama

Median salary
$110,560
Mean salary
$112,420
Employment
50
Location quotient
0.51
Jobs per 1,000
0.0
COL-adjusted median
$124,472
Regional Price Parity
88.8%

Exact state RPP match.

Full Life Scientists, All Other page for Alabama →

Related pages

Keep digging into life scientists, all other 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.