39 cities covered · Currency: EUR (€) · Capital: Riga
| Expense | Estimated cost | Basis |
|---|---|---|
| Meal at an inexpensive restaurant | €6.73 ($7.31) | per meal |
| Three-course meal for two, mid-range | €26.92 ($29.26) | per meal |
| Cappuccino | €2.02 ($2.19) | each |
| Monthly groceries (single person) | €153 ($166) | per month |
| Monthly public transport pass | €24.67 ($26.82) | per month |
| Basic utilities for an 85m² apartment | €65.05 ($70.70) | per month |
| Internet (60 Mbps, unlimited) | €18.84 ($20.48) | per month |
| Fitness club membership | €18.84 ($20.48) | per month |
| Cinema ticket | €4.93 ($5.36) | each |
| One-bedroom apartment in city centre | €296 ($322) | per month |
| One-bedroom apartment outside centre | €206 ($224) | per month |
| Three-bedroom apartment in city centre | €617 ($671) | per month |
Rīga · pop. 615,764
Augšdaugava · pop. 78,126
Liepāja · pop. 67,421
Jelgava · pop. 54,834
Jūrmala · pop. 52,001
Ventspils · pop. 32,723
Rēzekne · pop. 26,429
Valmiera · pop. 22,812
Ogre · pop. 22,757
Jēkabpils · pop. 21,014
Salaspils · pop. 17,865
Mārupe · pop. 16,801
Tukums · pop. 16,182
Cēsis · pop. 15,020
Sigulda · pop. 14,757
Kuldīga · pop. 9,863
Bauska · pop. 9,709
Saldus · pop. 9,686
Olaine · pop. 9,654
Talsi · pop. 8,673
Dobele · pop. 8,536
Ādaži · pop. 7,580
Ludza · pop. 7,332
Krāslava · pop. 6,797
Side-by-side cost of living comparison in Latvia
Side-by-side cost of living comparison in Latvia
Side-by-side cost of living comparison in Latvia
Side-by-side cost of living comparison in Latvia
Living costs in Latvia vary significantly depending on city size. Large metropolitan areas with populations over one million typically see housing costs 15–30% above the national average, while smaller towns can be 10–20% below it. The national baseline of €654 ($711) per month represents a mid-sized city estimate.
Capital cities and major economic hubs command the highest rents and overall expenses. For budget-conscious residents, mid-sized cities offer a balance of amenities and affordability. Rural and small-town living remains the most economical option, though transport and service access may be limited.