WIL Compensation Profiles · Research Brief · September 2026

Cost Estimators: Compensation Across the United States

Statewide and metro medians ranked against the national figure, OEWS May 2025

Where cost estimators earn the most and least across 49 states, the District, and 22 profiled metros — Massachusetts leads at a $100,840 median (+28.1% vs. the US figure), Arkansas trails at $61,470 — BLS OEWS May 2025.

Overview

This profile ranks what cost estimators are paid across the United States — every state plus the District of Columbia, and the twenty-two metropolitan areas with released WIL Compensation Profiles — against the national median, using the most recent federal occupational wage statistics. It covers the pre-construction and bid function. All figures are annual wages in US dollars from the BLS OEWS May 2025 reference period; statewide estimates average across metro and non-metro areas within each state. Unlike the state and metro profiles in this series, cross-geography comparison is the purpose of this page. The profile is produced under the Lab's public-source compensation benchmarking method (WIL-CBM-1.0): it is a public-data profile, not a peer survey, and it describes pay positioning only — it makes no claim about labor availability or hiring conditions.

Table 1. National annual wage distribution — Cost Estimators (SOC 13-1051), OEWS May 2025
Geography10th pctileMedianMean90th pctileEmployment
United States$48,530$78,740$85,390$130,820224,220

Annual wages, US dollars. Employment is OEWS-estimated national occupational employment. — Sources: BLS

Cost Estimators · OEWS May 2025
Ten highest statewide medians
US dollars, thousands. National median $78,740. Public-source federal statistics — pay positioning, not an availability measure.

Scroll horizontally to read the full chart →

Ten highest statewide mediansBar chart: Massachusetts 100.8; Wyoming 90.8; Colorado 86.9; Washington 86.1; California 85.5; Illinois 82.8; District of Columbia 82.7; Nevada 82.2; Rhode Island 82; Vermont 81.4, on a 0–110 scale.0285583110Massachusetts100.8Wyoming90.8Colorado86.9Washington86.1California85.5Illinois82.8District ofColumbia82.7Nevada82.2Rhode Island82Vermont81.4

Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics (OEWS), May 2025 — Cost Estimators (SOC 13-1051); United States, 49 states + DC, 22 profiled MSAs · Methodology WIL-CBM-1.0 · Public-source federal statistics. Annual wages in US dollars; OEWS estimates are modeled from employer surveys and carry published relative standard errors.

Table 2. Statewide median annual wage, ranked — Cost Estimators, OEWS May 2025
#StateMedian10th pctile90th pctileEmploymentvs. US
1Massachusetts$100,840$58,870$151,7804,520+28.1%
2Wyoming$90,790$52,680$108,490440+15.3%
3Colorado$86,940$58,890$137,5206,100+10.4%
4Washington$86,070$59,650$141,5407,470+9.3%
5California$85,460$51,750$150,79026,020+8.5%
6Illinois$82,750$49,200$136,5905,990+5.1%
7District of Columbia$82,730$66,720$127,520270+5.1%
8Nevada$82,200$49,200$132,3502,240+4.4%
9Rhode Island$81,990$60,180$130,740590+4.1%
10Vermont$81,390$56,600$113,230320+3.4%
11Maryland$81,190$50,660$130,9704,580+3.1%
12Connecticut$81,030$50,020$136,8302,350+2.9%
13Minnesota$80,810$56,640$125,3704,310+2.6%
14New Jersey$80,570$50,390$137,0805,240+2.3%
15Virginia$80,530$49,820$129,3305,840+2.3%
16Oregon$80,460$49,970$133,4602,940+2.2%
17New York$80,430$52,000$139,69011,980+2.1%
18Idaho$79,700$48,200$137,5301,600+1.2%
19Utah$79,610$51,740$126,8002,800+1.1%
20New Hampshire$79,560$51,640$129,030980+1.0%
21Delaware$79,290$49,580$108,280730+0.7%
22Pennsylvania$78,480$49,570$126,6209,420−0.3%
23Michigan$77,990$46,660$125,5206,960−1.0%
24Ohio$77,730$48,750$124,9908,100−1.3%
25West Virginia$77,480$42,730$122,450830−1.6%
26Montana$77,320$50,120$106,7401,230−1.8%
27Louisiana$77,030$43,840$125,0502,680−2.2%
28Arizona$77,010$37,440$127,8805,760−2.2%
29Texas$76,980$45,760$132,31020,760−2.2%
30Georgia$76,800$46,600$128,4206,010−2.5%
31Wisconsin$76,270$50,890$111,5305,150−3.1%
32Kansas$76,250$48,860$118,3102,250−3.2%
33Iowa$76,040$48,740$118,4101,870−3.4%
34Missouri$76,020$44,840$128,2706,580−3.5%
35Tennessee$75,650$42,440$120,9904,340−3.9%
36Alabama$74,990$42,400$118,1603,000−4.8%
37Florida$74,990$44,200$128,05013,720−4.8%
38South Dakota$74,950$57,110$129,5601,030−4.8%
39Kentucky$74,880$46,410$119,5301,960−4.9%
40North Carolina$74,730$43,580$123,2408,030−5.1%
41Maine$74,080$41,450$123,040760−5.9%
42Indiana$73,430$50,630$106,6404,810−6.7%
43North Dakota$73,280$52,730$104,050730−6.9%
44Nebraska$73,100$50,040$105,6401,330−7.2%
45Mississippi$71,230$41,600$118,0401,280−9.5%
46South Carolina$70,260$46,970$119,5902,880−10.8%
47Oklahoma$67,800$42,700$104,7501,860−13.9%
48New Mexico$67,590$38,960$109,610900−14.2%
49Arkansas$61,470$38,480$110,0401,400−21.9%

Ranked by published median. Percentages computed from OEWS medians as shown; positive = above the national median. Alaska and Hawaii are not in the Lab's warehouse and are omitted. “—” marks an estimate BLS does not publish — missing values are never shown as zero. — Sources: BLS

Table 3. Median annual wage in the 22 profiled metros, ranked — Cost Estimators, OEWS May 2025
#MetroStateMedian10th pctile90th pctileEmploymentvs. US
1San FranciscoCA$101,630$58,910$167,7803,300+29.1%
2San JoseCA$97,580$61,550$170,5501,680+23.9%
3San DiegoCA$87,170$55,610$151,1402,740+10.7%
4FresnoCA$84,140$51,170$149,690750+6.9%
5SacramentoCA$83,190$53,410$155,1401,930+5.7%
6AtlantaGA$82,870$49,500$134,7503,740+5.2%
7BakersfieldCA$82,390$49,540$145,340410+4.6%
8Los AngelesCA$82,260$51,220$140,3907,600+4.5%
9Las VegasNV$82,110$49,030$134,6801,560+4.3%
10NashvilleTN$81,300$47,400$127,7701,570+3.3%
11ColumbusOH$79,990$49,440$128,0201,570+1.6%
12Dallas–Fort WorthTX$79,290$47,950$134,4606,200+0.7%
13RaleighNC$79,230$38,350$131,4001,420+0.6%
14AustinTX$78,650$48,670$134,2301,990−0.1%
15HoustonTX$78,200$44,800$132,4505,660−0.7%
16CharlotteNC$77,990$47,520$127,6902,360−1.0%
17PhoenixAZ$77,590$37,440$128,9704,380−1.5%
18Riverside–San BernardinoCA$76,900$49,750$128,9403,160−2.3%
19MemphisTN$76,660$50,160$122,900630−2.6%
20College Station–BryanTX$75,590$43,150$102,380140−4.0%
21San AntonioTX$74,830$45,340$129,8401,690−5.0%
22SavannahGA$68,120$49,920$124,380240−13.5%

The twenty-two metropolitan statistical areas with released WIL Compensation Profiles; each links to its own profile in the series. — Sources: BLS

What the figures show

Massachusetts pays cost estimators the highest statewide median in the country, $100,840 — +28.1% against the $78,740 national figure — followed by Wyoming at $90,790. At the other end, Arkansas posts $61,470 (−21.9%), making the highest statewide median 1.64 times the lowest. 21 of the 49 states exceed the national median; 28 sit below it. Among the profiled metros, San Francisco leads at $101,630 (+29.1% vs. the US median), while Savannah is lowest at $68,120. Employment is concentrated: the five largest states — California (26,020), Texas (20,760), Florida (13,720), New York (11,980), Pennsylvania (9,420) — account for 37% of the 224,220 cost estimators counted nationally. These are observed wage comparisons only; nothing here measures how hard this occupation is to hire.

Method and limitations

Prepared under WIL-CBM-1.0 (Public-Source Compensation Benchmarking: A Method Note, WIL-RB-2026.3-COMP-METHOD). All figures are BLS OEWS May 2025 estimates for SOC 13-1051 read from the Lab's governed warehouse (BLS_OEWS ingest, September 2026): the United States, 49 states and the District of Columbia (Alaska and Hawaii are not in the warehouse and are omitted rather than estimated), and the twenty-two MSAs with released WIL Compensation Profiles. Rankings use the published median; the 10th and 90th percentiles are shown for distribution context. OEWS wages are modeled estimates with published relative standard errors, wider in small cells; statewide figures average metro and non-metro areas and can mask within-state variation visible in the metro table. Any cell BLS does not publish is shown as missing, never zero. Union density and prevailing-wage coverage differ sharply across these geographies and likely explain part of the spread, but OEWS does not identify bargaining status, so that is context, not a finding. This profile asserts pay positioning only — not workforce availability, not hiring conditions.

Suggested citationAlphaHire Workforce Intelligence Lab. (2026). Cost Estimators: Compensation Across the United States: Statewide and metro medians ranked against the national figure, OEWS May 2025 (Publication No. WIL-RB-2026.3-COMP-OCC-EST, Version 1.0). WIL Compensation Profiles.

Version 1.0 · Published 2026-09-30T17:00:00Z · Permanent ID WIL-RB-2026.3-COMP-OCC-EST. This record is versioned; the URL is permanent and stable for citation.

Export citation (BibTeX · RIS)
BibTeX
@techreport{WILRB20263COMPOCCEST,
  title       = {Cost Estimators: Compensation Across the United States: Statewide and metro medians ranked against the national figure, OEWS May 2025},
  author      = {AlphaHire Workforce Intelligence Lab},
  institution = {AlphaHire Workforce Intelligence Lab},
  type        = {WIL Compensation Profiles},
  number      = {WIL-RB-2026.3-COMP-OCC-EST},
  year        = {2026},
  note        = {Version 1.0; methodology WIL-CBM-1.0},
  url         = {https://wilinstitute.org/library/p/compensation-cost-estimators-across-the-united-states},
}
RIS
TY  - RPRT
AU  - AlphaHire Workforce Intelligence Lab
TI  - Cost Estimators: Compensation Across the United States: Statewide and metro medians ranked against the national figure, OEWS May 2025
PY  - 2026
PB  - AlphaHire Workforce Intelligence Lab
M1  - WIL-RB-2026.3-COMP-OCC-EST
ET  - Version 1.0
UR  - https://wilinstitute.org/library/p/compensation-cost-estimators-across-the-united-states
AB  - A public-source national compensation profile of cost estimators (SOC 13-1051), ranking statewide and metro-area median annual wages against the national median of $78,740 using BLS OEWS May 2025 estimates. 21 of 49 states sit above the national median; the highest statewide median (Massachusetts, $100,840) is 1.64 times the lowest (Arkansas, $61,470). Prepared under methodology WIL-CBM-1.0; this is a public-data profile, not a peer survey.
ER  -