What does it mean to be a great food city, and is it simply a matter of opinion?
A new study from Wallet Hub attempts to quantify "the best and cheapest foodie scenes" by studying 180 U.S. cities, ranked by 29 factors. The study suggests that data can prove why cities are (or are not) good places to eat based on things like cost of groceries, beer and wine prices, number of restaurants per capita and more.
Of the major cities in Texas, Dallas landed significantly behind Austin (No. 10 in the study); Houston (No. 18) and San Antonio (No. 21). Nationwide, Dallas was named No. 31. Fort Worth followed, at No. 80.
Perhaps not surprising is that all four Texas cities had a very good "affordability" rank, meaning groceries and restaurant costs are better in Texas than they are in states like Hawaii, parts of New York and parts of California.
Diversity, accessibility and quality were also factors, and statistics like "presence of Michelin-starred restaurants" and "food trucks per capita" were measured. Perhaps Michelin stars was one of the spots where Dallas fell lower on the list.
Texas cities aside, where should you head next on a trip to eat, eat, eat? Portland is the best food city in America; San Francisco is the second best, the study shows. Miami and New York City follow.
Here are the Texas cities that made Wallet Hub's list of 'best foodie cities in America'
- No. 10: Austin
- 18: Houston
- 21: San Antonio
- 31: Dallas
- 80: Fort Worth
- 84: Irving
- 90: Laredo
- 100: El Paso
- 102: Arlington
- 105: Plano
- 111: Amarillo
- 112: Corpus Christi
- 118: Garland
- 119: Brownsville
- 133: Lubbock
- 169: Grand Prairie
