BLOGS: Bus bunching, diffusing conflict, congestion charging, etc.
2019's Cities with the Best (and Worst) Public Transportation
Ranks 100 U.S. cities across three key dimensions: Accessibility; Convenience; Safety; Reliability; and Public Transit Resources.

Seattle ranked as the "best" city for public transportation in the U.S. in a new report from WalletHub.
Photo: King County Metro
Public transportation may be a simple convenience or an absolute daily necessity, depending on the city and the size of its population. The scope of public transportation in giant metropolises like New York City can be massive.
According to the MTA, the New York City subway has over 665 mainland track miles and transports over 1.75 billion passengers per year. That’s not to mention the city’s 5,700 buses that carry over 760 million passengers per year.
There are many benefits to using public transportation over personal vehicles. The first is economic growth. According to the American Public Transportation Association, “every $1 invested in public transportation generates $4 in economic returns.” In addition, the APTA states that taking public transportation is cheaper in the long run than buying a vehicle and paying for its upkeep and gas costs. Public transportation also has drastically lower odds of an accident than driving a personal vehicle and helps to cut down pollution from emissions.
But not all cities have the same quality of public transportation. To find out where passengers will fare best during their daily commute, WalletHub compared 100 cities across 17 key metrics. Our data set ranges from share of commuters who use public transit and average age of the fleet to number of injuries and peak hours spent in congestion.
Main Findings
Cities with the Best Public Transportation
Overall Rank (1=Best) | City | Total Score | ‘Accessibility & Convenience’ Rank | ‘Safety & Reliability’ Rank | ‘Public Transit Resources’ Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | Seattle, WA | 77.97 | 7 | 6 | 3 |
2 | Boston, MA | 77.84 | 2 | 34 | 10 |
3 | San Francisco, CA | 75.21 | 1 | 27 | 80 |
4 | Washington, DC | 71.23 | 3 | 48 | 52 |
5 | Madison, WI | 71.06 | 46 | 1 | 4 |
6 | Jersey City, NJ | 69.05 | 4 | 22 | 97 |
7 | New York, NY | 68.87 | 5 | 22 | 97 |
8 | Reno, NV | 68.13 | 76 | 8 | 1 |
9 | Honolulu, HI | 67.85 | 30 | 13 | 12 |
10 | Portland, OR | 66.82 | 13 | 31 | 29 |
11 | Minneapolis, MN | 66.72 | 8 | 51 | 31 |
12 | Denver, CO | 65.98 | 14 | 25 | 27 |
13 | Oakland, CA | 65.68 | 10 | 27 | 80 |
14 | Los Angeles, CA | 64.79 | 15 | 15 | 60 |
15 | San Jose, CA | 64.47 | 21 | 21 | 35 |
16 | Boise, ID | 64.45 | 82 | 3 | 37 |
17 | Lubbock, TX | 64.33 | 92 | 14 | 5 |
18 | Milwaukee, WI | 64.18 | 42 | 4 | 18 |
19 | San Diego, CA | 64.13 | 32 | 11 | 15 |
20 | Austin, TX | 63.66 | 19 | 68 | 2 |
21 | Baltimore, MD | 63.50 | 12 | 35 | 79 |
22 | Chicago, IL | 63.33 | 6 | 71 | 59 |
23 | Lincoln, NE | 63.10 | 24 | 20 | 46 |
24 | Chula Vista, CA | 62.46 | 89 | 11 | 15 |
25 | Laredo, TX | 61.52 | 99 | 5 | 43 |
26 | Santa Ana, CA | 61.48 | 35 | 15 | 60 |
27 | Long Beach, CA | 61.25 | 38 | 15 | 60 |
28 | Omaha, NE | 60.93 | 69 | 1 | 93 |
29 | Wichita, KS | 60.76 | 66 | 7 | 30 |
30 | Newark, NJ | 60.17 | 16 | 22 | 97 |
31 | Memphis, TN | 60.14 | 58 | 10 | 87 |
32 | St. Paul, MN | 59.00 | 27 | 51 | 31 |
33 | Pittsburgh, PA | 58.96 | 39 | 53 | 33 |
34 | El Paso, TX | 58.51 | 61 | 40 | 45 |
35 | Fremont, CA | 58.29 | 43 | 27 | 80 |
36 | Greensboro, NC | 58.21 | 57 | 43 | 36 |
37 | Cincinnati, OH | 58.17 | 37 | 42 | 40 |
38 | Irvine, CA | 57.88 | 70 | 15 | 60 |
39 | Toledo, OH | 57.77 | 77 | 58 | 7 |
40 | Albuquerque, NM | 57.67 | 11 | 88 | 19 |
41 | San Antonio, TX | 57.63 | 49 | 55 | 6 |
42 | Aurora, CO | 57.60 | 81 | 25 | 27 |
43 | Corpus Christi, TX | 57.43 | 54 | 67 | 8 |
44 | Anaheim, CA | 57.16 | 74 | 15 | 60 |
45 | San Bernardino, CA | 56.94 | 60 | 32 | 49 |
46 | Cleveland, OH | 56.65 | 18 | 73 | 53 |
47 | Atlanta, GA | 56.47 | 22 | 41 | 96 |
48 | Riverside, CA | 56.37 | 65 | 32 | 49 |
49 | Birmingham, AL | 56.15 | 97 | 30 | 44 |
50 | Durham, NC | 56.06 | 36 | 49 | 66 |
51 | Las Vegas, NV | 56.06 | 44 | 37 | 76 |
52 | Miami, FL | 55.86 | 20 | 45 | 94 |
53 | Tucson, AZ | 55.85 | 33 | 57 | 41 |
54 | Detroit, MI | 55.47 | 52 | 47 | 73 |
55 | Phoenix, AZ | 55.39 | 26 | 61 | 67 |
56 | Orlando, FL | 55.07 | 25 | 78 | 38 |
57 | Lexington-Fayette, KY | 54.96 | 63 | 77 | 11 |
58 | Anchorage, AK | 54.88 | 50 | 54 | 42 |
59 | Fort Wayne, IN | 54.85 | 88 | 50 | 55 |
60 | Colorado Springs, CO | 54.66 | 79 | 72 | 9 |
61 | Jacksonville, FL | 54.16 | 62 | 36 | 83 |
62 | Columbus, OH | 54.13 | 45 | 59 | 54 |
63 | Buffalo, NY | 53.91 | 40 | 56 | 75 |
64 | Stockton, CA | 53.82 | 90 | 9 | 84 |
65 | Dallas, TX | 53.78 | 29 | 79 | 20 |
66 | Nashville, TN | 53.73 | 31 | 60 | 85 |
67 | Scottsdale, AZ | 53.32 | 68 | 61 | 67 |
68 | Houston, TX | 53.32 | 34 | 70 | 65 |
69 | North Las Vegas, NV | 52.72 | 94 | 37 | 76 |
70 | Sacramento, CA | 52.09 | 51 | 44 | 90 |
71 | Virginia Beach, VA | 51.99 | 47 | 74 | 56 |
72 | Winston-Salem, NC | 51.63 | 85 | 69 | 14 |
73 | Raleigh, NC | 51.42 | 41 | 89 | 13 |
74 | Norfolk, VA | 51.18 | 48 | 74 | 56 |
75 | Irving, TX | 51.12 | 56 | 79 | 20 |
76 | Glendale, AZ | 50.84 | 98 | 61 | 67 |
77 | Garland, TX | 50.38 | 84 | 79 | 20 |
78 | Hialeah, FL | 50.28 | 83 | 45 | 94 |
79 | Fresno, CA | 50.22 | 71 | 87 | 26 |
80 | Henderson, NV | 50.09 | 95 | 37 | 76 |
81 | Louisville, KY | 49.83 | 64 | 85 | 47 |
82 | Chandler, AZ | 49.55 | 80 | 61 | 67 |
83 | Chesapeake, VA | 49.38 | 93 | 74 | 56 |
84 | Fort Worth, TX | 49.26 | 75 | 79 | 20 |
85 | Plano, TX | 49.13 | 78 | 79 | 20 |
86 | Mesa, AZ | 49.00 | 86 | 61 | 67 |
87 | Bakersfield, CA | 48.98 | 59 | 86 | 74 |
88 | Kansas City, MO | 48.76 | 23 | 93 | 34 |
89 | Philadelphia, PA | 48.73 | 9 | 97 | 86 |
90 | Gilbert, AZ | 48.52 | 100 | 61 | 67 |
91 | St. Louis, MO | 46.51 | 17 | 96 | 51 |
92 | Baton Rouge, LA | 46.26 | 91 | 91 | 17 |
93 | Arlington, TX | 45.70 | 96 | 79 | 20 |
94 | Oklahoma City, OK | 45.64 | 55 | 90 | 89 |
95 | Tulsa, OK | 43.02 | 72 | 94 | 48 |
96 | New Orleans, LA | 42.43 | 28 | 92 | 100 |
97 | Charlotte, NC | 40.67 | 53 | 95 | 88 |
98 | Tampa, FL | 24.69 | 67 | 98 | 91 |
99 | St. Petersburg, FL | 24.03 | 73 | 98 | 91 |
100 | Indianapolis, IN | 21.13 | 87 | 100 | 39 |
Survey Methodology
To determine the cities with the best and worst public transportation systems, WalletHub compared a sample of 100 U.S. cities across three key dimensions: 1) Accessibility & Convenience, 2) Safety & Reliability and 3) Public Transit Resources.
We evaluated those dimensions using 17 relevant metrics, which are listed below with their corresponding weights. Each metric was graded on a 100-point scale, with a score of 100 representing the most favorable living conditions.
Finally, we determined each city’s weighted average across all metrics to calculate its overall score and used the resulting scores to rank-order the cities in our sample. Our sample considers only the city proper in each case and excludes cities in the surrounding metro area.
Accessibility & Convenience – Total Points: 40
Share of Commuters Who Use Public Transit: Double Weight (~6.15 Points)
Average Commute Time for Transit Users: Full Weight (~3.08 Points)
Average Car Commute Time as Share of Average Public Transport Commute Time: Double Weight (~6.15 Points)
Transit Connectivity Index: Full Weight (~3.08 Points) Note: The TCI is a measure of how connected the average household member is to the availability of a transit ride.
Jobs Accessible Within a 30 Minute Transit Commute per 100 Civilian Employed Residents: Full Weight (~3.08 Points)
Peak Hours Spent in Congestion: Full Weight (~3.08 Points) Note: The total number of hours lost in congestion during peak commute periods compared to free-flow periods on a per capita basis. Peak corresponds to the absolute worst portion of the morning and afternoon commute, while free-flow is the best performance experienced over 24 hours.
Annual Public Transport Cost as Share of Median Annual Household Income: Double Weight (~6.15 Points)
Share of Commuters Who Prefer Public Transport: Full Weight (~3.08 Points) Note: This refers to commuters that choose public transportation even if they have one or more vehicles available.
Presence of Dedicated Rapid Bus & Rail Transport: Full Weight (~3.08 Points) Note: This binary metric measures the presence or absence of dedicated rapid bus and rail systems in a city.
Airport Accessibility by Public Transit: Full Weight (~3.08 Points) Note: This binary metric measures the presence or absence of a direct fixed-guideway access to an airport terminal or free bus shuttle access from rail station to an airport terminal.
Safety & Reliability – Total Points: 40
Public Transit Safety and Security Events per Passenger Miles Traveled: Full Weight (~10.00 Points) Note: Events include the following: collision, derailment, fire, security and not otherwise classified events.
Public Transit Injuries per Passenger Miles Traveled: Full Weight (~10.00 Points)
Public Transit Fatalities per Passenger Miles Traveled: Double Weight (~20.00 Points)
Public Transit Resources – Total Points: 20
Public Transport System Total Fixed Guideway Directional Route Miles per Urbanized Area Population: Full Weight (~4.00 Points) Note: The mileage in each direction over which public transportation vehicles travel while in revenue service.
Total Public Transit Vehicles Operated in Annual Maximum Service per Service Area Population: Double Weight (~8.00 Points) Note: The number of revenue vehicles operated to meet the annual maximum service requirement.
Average Age of Public Transit Fleet: Full Weight (~4.00 Points)
Average Lifetime Miles per Active Vehicles: Full Weight (~4.00 Points) Note: The total miles accumulated on all active vehicles since date of manufacture divided by the number of active vehicles.
Article, originally posted Sept.10, 2019, reprinted with permission from WalletHub.com
More Management

FIFA World Cup Matches Are Driving Record Transit Ridership Nationwide
See how World Cup matches are generating record transit demand across North America, with ridership surpassing Super Bowls, concerts, and Olympic-era events.
Read More →
The Hidden Cost of Fuel Data Inaccuracy in Public Transit Fleets
In today's transit environment, accurate fuel and mileage data are critical to reducing costs, minimizing downtime, and improving fleet performance.
Read More →
Virginia's $28.5B Transportation Plan Targets Transit and Rail
Approved by the Commonwealth Transportation Board, the program supports ongoing infrastructure projects while providing new investments in transit, state of good repair and transportation alternatives.
Read More →
Latinos In Transit Seeks Host Organization for 2027 Leadership Summit
The selected host organization will showcase its transit system, projects, and community while welcoming hundreds of industry leaders and emerging professionals during Hispanic Heritage Month.
Read More →
Bipartisan BUSES Act Seeks Changes to New York City's Bus Idling Enforcement Program
Backed by motorcoach operators, the legislation seeks to balance emissions goals with passenger safety by allowing limited idling for inspections, accessibility needs and extreme weather conditions.
Read More →
DOT: Brightline Corridor Incidents Fall 30% Following Federal Safety Upgrades
Safety improvements funded through a $25 million federal investment are credited with reducing trespassing and train-vehicle collisions along the Brightline Florida corridor.
Read More →
D Line Expansion Fuels Growth Across LA Metro's Rail System
Weekend rail ridership was especially strong, soaring 18% as riders embraced expanded access to jobs, entertainment, dining, and cultural destinations, said the agency. Total system ridership for May, including bus and rail, was 26,966,657.
Read More →
Q4 Travel Data Reveals Drop in Vehicle Traffic to Manhattan Congestion Zone
NYMTC’s quarterly Travel Patterns Report provides a snapshot of travel activity throughout New York City, Long Island, the Lower Hudson Valley, and northern New Jersey using data collected from the agencies operating the region’s bridges, tunnels, and public transit systems.
Read More →
Southern California's Metrolink Debuts Contactless Fare Payment Pilot
Customers traveling between Redlands and Los Angeles can now tap their preferred payment method, including a credit or debit card, mobile wallet, or wearable device, at station validators before boarding and again while exiting.
Read More →
California's BART Approves FY27 Budget While Maintaining Service Levels
The budget covers July 1, 2026, through June 30, 2027, a period when pandemic emergency funds run out, the District faces a structural deficit of $375 million, and a regional transit funding measure may appear on the November ballot.
Read More →