While a budget of $1,500 scores plenty of space in many Sunbelt cities, space and affordability are on the chopping block for those hoping to live in Massachusetts.

That’s according to researchers at RentCafe who ranked the 200 largest cities in the contiguous United States by the size and cost of available rentals using data sourced from Yardi Matrix.

To any renter who’s attempted to find budget-friendly housing options in Massachusetts recently, it likely comes as no surprise that the many cities in the Commonwealth ranked among places where $1500 afforded the least amount of space.

Boston

In Boston, a $1,500 budget covered 308 square feet of apartment space. That’s less than half of the national average of 703 square feet. Boston’s high prices placed it at No. 197 out of the 200 metros ranked, outpaced only by Brooklyn, New York, Manhattan and San Francisco.

Springfield

Springfield ranked as the most affordable option in Massachusetts and the greater New England region. A budget of $1,500 secured 711 square feet of space — plenty of room for a bedroom or two. However, the city followed a downward trend from last year, when the same budget scored an additional 22 square feet.

Worcester

A studio or one-bedroom apartment is within reach for Worcester renters with a budget of $1,500. This amount stretched to cover 595 square feet of space, still far below the national average of 703 square feet.

How do these cities compare regionally and nationally?

Across other New England metros, space remained similarly constrained. A $1,500 budget fetched 646 square feet in Bridgeport, Connecticut, and 499 square feet in Providence, Rhode Island.

Cities where $1,500 stretched the furthest included McAllen, Texas, at 1,378 square feet, and Macon, Georgia, at 1,346 square feet. Notably, in around two-thirds of the cities analyzed, $1,500 garnered more space than the national average.