The study ranked U.S. metro areas based on their ability to create and sustain jobs, measuring employment, salary growth and technology output. An explanation is listed below for how Austin obtained an overall first place ranking. The favorable Texas business environment also helped Austin and other Texas cities along with a pattern of low taxes. The recent $500 million research funding for Tier One Universities was also cited. 

1)      Five-Year Job Growth. Metropolitan area job growth relative to the United States average between 2003 and

        2008.   U.S. averge = 100.0 

2)      One-Year Job Growth. Metropolitan area job growth relative to the United States average between 2007 and 2008.  

         U.S. average = 100.0

3)      Five-Year Wages & Salaries Growth. Salary and Wage disbursements growth relative to the United States average

         between    2002 and 2007. U.S. average = 100.0

4)      One-Year Wages & Salaries Growth. Salary and Wage disbursements growth relative to the United States average

         between 2006 and 2007. U.S. average = 100.0

5)      Short Term Job Growth. Job Growth/decline between March 2008 and March 2009 percentage.

6)      Five-Year Relative High Tech GDP Growth. High tech sector output growth relative to the United States average between 2003  and 2008. U.S. average = 100.0

7)      One-Year Relative High Tech GDP Growth. High tech sector output growth relative to the United States average between

         2007 and 2008. U.S. average = 100.0

8)      2008 High Tech GDP Location Quotient. Combined Metropolitan area high tech location quotient during 2008. Location

         Quotient (LQ) is a measure of high tech concentration (U.S. = 1.0). A metro with an LQ higher than 1.0 is said to be more

         concentrated than the United States and vice versa.

9)      Number of Highly Concentrated High Tech Industries. Measures the number of high technology industries with a l

         location quotient (LQ) about the U.S. average of 1.0 during 2008.