Farebox Recovery Ratio
The farebox recovery ratio of a transit system is the percentage of total operating expenses that are made up by passenger fares. The figure is calculated by dividing total passenger-fare revenue by total operating expenses. Farebox-recovery ratio is a key metric used to judge the financial health of transit systems, and varies heavily based on geography, fare structure, and ridership patterns.
Because farebox recovery ratio deals with operating expenses alone rather than total (capital + operating) expenses, the following types of transit systems tend to have higher overall farebox-recovery ratios:
- Rail-Based (particularly commuter or high-capacity rail)
- Distance or Zone-Based Fares
- Asian and European systems
Few major transit systems throughout the world have a farebox-recovery ratio of 100%. Within California, BART has the highest farebox-recovery ratio, and a variety of state laws use this metric to evaluate transit-system performance. For example, in order to qualify for funding under the state Transportation Development Act (TDA), urban transit agencies must maintain a farebox ratio of 20% and rural agencies must maintain a ratio of 10%. Exceptions are sometimes made for new routes or routes that serve disadvantaged populations. In the United States, California ranks seventh for farebox-recovery ratio, at 27.9% (behind New Jersey, New York, Washington D.C., Pennsylvania, Illinois, and Massachusetts). (Baselines 174-5). Within California, the Bay Area has the highest farebox-recovery ratio (60.9% within the MTC MPO area), while the Los Angeles area has among the lowest (21.4%).
Wikipedia Table of Farebox Ratios of Major Transit Systems around the world
Continent | Country | System | Ratio | Fare system | Fare rate | Year |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Asia | Hong Kong | Hong Kong MTR | 123.68%[1] | Distance based | HK$3.5+ (cash)
HK$3.5+ (Octopus card) |
2016 |
Asia | Japan | Osaka (Hankyu Railway) | 123% | Distance based | ¥150+ | 1991[2] |
Asia | Japan | Osaka (OMTB) | 137% | Distance based | ¥200+ | 1991[2] |
Asia | Japan | JR East | 84.39%[3] | Distance based | 2016 | |
Asia | Japan | Tokyo Metro | 119.05%[4] | Distance based | ¥160+ | 2016 |
Asia | Japan | Tokyo Toei rail services | 73.82%[5] | Distance based | 2015 | |
Asia | Taiwan | Taipei Metro | 100.14%[6] | Distance based | NT$20+ (cash)
NT$16+ (EasyCard or other cards) |
2015 |
Asia | Taiwan | Kaohsiung MRT | 83.16%[7] | Distance based | NT$20+ (cash)
NT$17+ (iPASS or other cards) |
2015 |
Asia | Singapore | Singapore (SMRT) | 100.76% | Distance based | SGD 1.10+ (cash)
SGD 0.77+ (EZ-Link Card) |
2017[8] |
Asia | China | Beijing Subway | 59.5%Template:Citation needed | Distance based | CNY 3.00+ | 2012[9] |
Europe | Netherlands | Amsterdam (GVB) | 86.5% | Distance based | 2016[10] | |
Europe | Netherlands | Rotterdam (RET) | 80.2% | Distance based | 2016[11] | |
Europe | Germany | Berlin | 70.3% | Zone based | EUR 2.60+ | 2010[12] |
Europe | Belgium | Brussels | 35.2% | 2007[13] | ||
Europe | Denmark | Copenhagen | 52% | Zone based | 1991[14] | |
Europe | UK | London Underground | 107.25% | Zone based | 2016[15] | |
Europe | Spain | Metropolitan lines of Ferrocarrils de la Generalitat de Catalunya (FGC) | 93.18% | Zone based | 2014[16] | |
Europe | Spain | Madrid | 41.3% | 2007[13] | ||
Europe | Italy | Milan | 28% | 1991[14] | ||
Europe | Germany | Munich | 42% | Zone based | 1991[14] | |
Europe | Czech Republic | Prague (DPP) | 53.2% | Flat rate | CZK 24+ | 2013[17] |
Europe | France | Paris (STIF) | 29.7% | Zone based for passes Distance based for tickets |
€1.80 | 2014[18] |
Europe | Sweden | Stockholm | 37% | Zone based | SEK 44–88 (conductor) SEK 25–50 (SL Access card) Note: Tickets are not sold on buses. |
2007[13] |
Europe | Italy | Rome | 36% | 2007[13] | ||
Europe | Austria | Vienna | 50% | Flat rate | EUR 2.00 | 1991[14] |
Europe | Finland | Helsinki | 49%[19] | Zone based; each borough forms a zone. Boroughs with a small area are treated as being part of one of their neighbouring boroughs. | EUR 2.80–7.00 (cash) EUR 1.90–5.60 (travel card) Transfer free of charge |
2011 |
Europe | Switzerland | Zurich | 60% | Zone based | CHF 4.30+ | 2014[14] |
North America | USA | Amtrak | 71% | Distance & demand based | 2009[20] | |
North America | Canada | VIA Rail | 50.9% | Distance & demand based | 2016[21] | |
North America | USA | Atlanta (MARTA) | 24.7% | Flat rate | Template:Currency | 2015[22] |
North America | USA | Austin (CMTA) | 12.3% | Flat rate | Template:Currency–Template:Currency, depending on modality | 2015[23] |
North America | Canada | Brampton (BT) | 46% | Flat rate | C$3.25 (cash)
C$2.65 (Presto Card) |
2012[24] |
North America | USA | Boston (MBTA) | 30.4% | Flat rate | Template:Currency (cash) / Template:Currency (CharlieCard) | 2016/17[25] |
North America | Canada | Calgary | 50% | Flat rate | C$3.00 | 2012[26] |
North America | USA | Chicago (CTA) | 55.2% | Flat rate | Template:Currency (cash and Ventra) | 2016[27] |
North America | USA | Chicago (Metra) | 42.9% | Zone based | Template:Currency+ | 2015[22] |
North America | USA | Cleveland (GCRTA) | 20% | Flat rate | Template:Currency | 2014[28] |
North America | USA | Dallas (DART) | 15.3% | Flat rate | Template:Currency | 2016[29] |
North America | USA | Detroit (DDOT) | 15.2% | Flat rate | Template:Currency | 2014[30] |
North America | Canada | Edmonton (ETS) | 39.4% | Flat rate | C$3.00 | 2007[31] |
North America | USA | Harrisburg, PA (CAT) | 17.1% | Flat rate | Template:Currency | 2015[22] |
North America | USA | Las Vegas Monorail | 100% | Flat rate | Template:Currency | 2015[32] |
North America | USA | Long Island (MTA) | 50.0% | Zone based | Template:Currency+ | 2012[33] |
North America | USA | Los Angeles (LACMTA) | 25.5% | Flat rate | Template:Currency, with discounts for seniors, disabled, students | 2015[34] |
North America | USA | Maryland | 23.1% | Variable | Template:Currency–Template:Currency, depending on distance & modality | 2012[33] |
North America | USA | Miami | 23% | 2015[22] | ||
North America | USA | Minneapolis – St. Paul | 25.2% | Flat rate with rush hour and express surcharges | Template:Currency to Template:Currency | 2015[22] |
North America | Canada | Mississauga (MiWay) | 46% | Flat rate | C$3.25 | 2011[35] |
North America | Canada | Montreal (STM) | 45.9% | Flat rate | C$3.25 | 2016[36] |
North America | USA | New York City MTA | 37.75%[37] | Flat rate | Template:Currency | 2016 |
North America | USA | New York City (NYC Ferry) | 29.41% | Flat Rate | Template:Currency | 2017[38] |
North America | USA | New York/Connecticut (MTA) | 36.2% | Distance based | Template:Currency+ | 2009 Q1[39] |
North America | USA | New York/New Jersey (PATH) | 41.0% | Flat rate | Template:Currency | 2015[40] |
North America | USA | New Jersey (NJT) | 44% | Distance based | Template:Currency | 2014[41] |
North America | USA | Orlando (Lynx) | 25.0% | Flat rate | Template:Currency | 2015[22] |
North America | Canada | Ottawa (OC Transpo) | 45% | Flat rate | C$3.65 (Cash) | 2014[42] |
North America | USA | Philadelphia (SEPTA) | 39.5% | Flat rate | Template:Currency (cash) / Template:Currency (Token) / Template:Currency (Transfer) | 2015[22] |
North America | USA | Pierce County, WA | 29.6% | Flat rate | Template:Currency | 2015[22] |
North America | USA | Philadelphia/New Jersey (PATCO) | 49.4% | Distance based | Template:Currency+ | 2015[22] |
North America | USA | Portland Metro Area (TriMet) | 31.5% | Flat rate | Template:Currency | 2012[43]2015[22] |
North America | USA | Greater Seattle Area (King County Metro) | 30.1% | Zone and peak based | Template:Currency+[44] | 2016[45] |
North America | USA | Puget Sound Region (Sound Transit) | 41.5% | Zone & distance based | Template:Currency+ (Bus)[46]
Template:Currency+ (Light Rail)[46] Template:Currency+ (Commuter Rail)[46] |
2017[47] |
North America | Canada | Quebec City (RTC) | 39% | Flat rate | C$3.00 | 2011[35] |
North America | USA | San Antonio (VIA) | 12.8% | Flat rate | Template:Currency | 2015[22] |
North America | USA | San Diego MTS | 40.6% | Flat rate | Template:Currency | 2015[32] |
North America | USA | San Francisco Bay Area (BART) | 80.0% | Distance based | Template:Currency+ | 2015[32] |
North America | USA | Oakland Airport Connector | 96% | Flat rate | Template:Currency | 2015/2016[48] |
North America | USA | San Francisco Bay Area (Caltrain) | 63% | Zone based | Template:Currency+ | 2015[49] |
North America | USA | San Francisco Bay Area (SFMTA) | 35% | Flat rate | Template:Currency | 2016[50] |
North America | USA | Santa Clara County (VTA) | 10% | Express surcharges | Template:Currency to Template:Currency | 2016[51] |
North America | USA | Southern California Regional Rail Authority | 41.8% | Distance based | Template:Currency to Template:Currency | 2017[52] |
North America | USA | Staten Island (MTA) | 15.2% | Flat rate | Template:Currency | 2015[40] |
North America | Canada | Toronto (TTC) | 69.9% | Flat rate | C$3.00 (tokens/electronic fare card) $3.25 (cash) Jan 2017[53] | 2016[54] |
North America | Canada | Toronto, Hamilton and area (GO Transit) | 76.6% | Distance based | C$5.30+ | 2015/16[55] |
North America | Canada | Vancouver TransLink | 55%[56] | Zone based | C$2.50+ | 2016 |
North America | USA | Washington, DC (WMATA) | 45.4% | Distance and time based | Template:Currency+ | 2015[22] |
North America | Canada | Winnipeg | 60% | Flat rate | C$2.50 | 2011[35] |
Oceania | New Zealand | Auckland | 44% | Zone Based | 2012/13[57] | |
Oceania | Australia | Canberra | 21% | Flat rate | A$4.20 | 2007[58] |
Oceania | Australia | Sydney | 20% | Distance based | A$0.15 / km | 2014[59] |
Oceania | Australia | Melbourne | 30% | Zone and time based | From A$3.76 / hour / zone | 2014[60] |
Oceania | New Zealand | Christchurch | 35% | Zone Based | 2012/13[57] | |
Oceania | New Zealand | Dunedin | 54% | Zone Based | 2012/13[57] | |
Oceania | New Zealand | Hamilton | 34% | Flat rate | 2012/13[57] | |
Oceania | New Zealand | Wellington | 57% | Zone Based | 2012/13[57] |
- ↑ Template:Cite web
- ↑ 2.0 2.1 Dr. Kenichi Shoji, "Lessons from Japanese Experiences of Roles of Public and Private Sectors in Urban Transport", Japan Railway & Transport Review, December 2001
- ↑ Template:Cite web
- ↑ Template:Cite web
- ↑ Template:Cite web
- ↑ Template:Cite web
- ↑ Template:Cite web
- ↑ Template:Cite web
- ↑ "杭州地铁拟定票价 “贵”为全国前三 市民喊吃不消" 钱江晚报 Template:Webarchive (in Chinese) 20 July 2012
- ↑ Template:Cite web
- ↑ Template:Cite web
- ↑ Template:Cite web
- ↑ 13.0 13.1 13.2 13.3 Template:Cite web
- ↑ 14.0 14.1 14.2 14.3 14.4 Template:Cite web
- ↑ Template:Cite web
- ↑ Template:Cite journal
- ↑ Template:Cite web
- ↑
- ↑ Template:Cite web
- ↑ Template:Cite web
- ↑ Template:Cite web
- ↑ 22.00 22.01 22.02 22.03 22.04 22.05 22.06 22.07 22.08 22.09 22.10 22.11 Template:Cite web
- ↑ Template:Cite web
- ↑ Template:Cite web
- ↑ Template:Cite web
- ↑ Template:Cite web
- ↑ Template:Cite web
- ↑ Template:Cite web
- ↑ Template:Cite web
- ↑ Template:Cite web
- ↑ City of Edmonton
- ↑ 32.0 32.1 32.2 Template:Cite web
- ↑ 33.0 33.1 [1] Template:Webarchive
- ↑ Template:Cite web
- ↑ 35.0 35.1 35.2 [2] Template:Webarchive
- ↑ [3]
- ↑ Template:Cite web
- ↑ Template:Cite news
- ↑ Metro-North Railroad Financial Ratios (March 2009)
- ↑ 40.0 40.1 Template:Cite journal
- ↑ Template:Cite web
- ↑ http://www.octranspo.com/index.php/about-octranspo/reports
- ↑ TriMet Fare Charges Template:Webarchive Retrieved 12 November 2012
- ↑ Template:Cite web
- ↑ King County Metro Accountability Center - Financial, Retrieved 24 Jun 2017
- ↑ 46.0 46.1 46.2 Template:Cite news
- ↑ Sound Transit 2017 Adopted Budget
- ↑ Template:Cite news
- ↑ Template:Cite web
- ↑ Template:Cite web
- ↑ Template:Cite news
- ↑ Template:Cite web
- ↑ Template:Cite web
- ↑ Template:Cite web
- ↑ Metrolinx Annual Report 2015-2016
- ↑ Template:Cite web
- ↑ 57.0 57.1 57.2 57.3 57.4 Template:Cite web
- ↑ [4] Template:Webarchive
- ↑ Template:Cite web
- ↑ [5] Template:Webarchive