Skip to main content
ZipVitals

How Connecticut's ZIP codes measure up on health

The ZipVitals Score across Connecticut — built one ZIP code at a time, then rolled up to the state by resident population.

Data release 2026277 of 280 ZIP codes scored · 3.6M residents represented

Score snapshot

59.08Statewide ZipVitals Scorepopulation-weighted average of its ZIP codes
62.13Median scoremiddle of 277 scored ZIPs
75.00Highest score06878 · Riverside
25.81Lowest score06702 · Waterbury
49.19Spreadpoints between highest & lowest ZIP

People & national context

#6State rankof 51 states and equivalents with a computed score
26%Residents in below-average ZIPs0.95M of 3.6M, in ZIPs scoring under the national average (53.48)
0.62MResidents in the top 50 ZIPs17% of the state
0.95MResidents in the bottom 50 ZIPs26% of the state
5ZIPs in the national top 100led by 06878 · Riverside

Connecticut's ZIP codes, ranked

Highest-scoring

Top 50 of 277
  1. 106878in Riverside · 8,328 residents75.00
  2. 206890in Southport · 4,653 residents74.48
  3. 306880in Westport · 27,583 residents74.22
  4. 406870in Old Greenwich · 7,864 residents74.12
  5. 506883in Weston · 10,396 residents74.04
  6. 606840in New Canaan · 20,870 residents73.59
  7. 706820in Darien · 21,936 residents73.49
  8. 806897in Wilton · 18,777 residents73.36
  9. 906853in Norwalk · 3,171 residents72.92
  10. 1006831in Greenwich · 15,210 residents72.86
  11. 1106877in Ridgefield · 25,110 residents72.52
  12. 1206896in Redding · 8,779 residents71.98
  13. 1306903in Stamford · 14,010 residents71.96
  14. 1406807in Cos Cob · 7,650 residents71.83
  15. 1506612in Easton · 7,670 residents71.75
  16. 1606824in Fairfield · 36,716 residents71.44
  17. 1706525in New Haven · 9,073 residents71.14
  18. 1806443in Madison · 17,657 residents71.07
  19. 1906468in Monroe · 18,949 residents70.62
  20. 2006783in Roxbury · 2,185 residents70.52
  21. 2106905in Stamford · 20,725 residents70.34
  22. 2206107in West Hartford · 19,891 residents70.29
  23. 2306784in Sherman · 3,583 residents69.93
  24. 2406825in Fairfield · 21,982 residents69.78
  25. 2506117in West Hartford · 16,116 residents69.53
  26. 2606752in Bridgewater · 1,658 residents69.44
  27. 2706611in Trumbull · 37,281 residents69.40
  28. 2806092in West Simsbury · 4,665 residents69.37
  29. 2906089in Weatogue · 3,728 residents69.35
  30. 3006073in South Glastonbury · 5,372 residents69.04
  31. 3106001in Avon · 19,153 residents68.54
  32. 3206470in Newtown · 15,593 residents68.52
  33. 3306248in Hebron · 5,509 residents68.48
  34. 3406901in Stamford · 11,037 residents68.36
  35. 3506033in Glastonbury · 29,921 residents68.32
  36. 3606426in Essex · 3,267 residents68.27
  37. 3706804in Brookfield · 17,908 residents68.20
  38. 3806477in Orange · 14,315 residents67.86
  39. 3906232in Andover · 3,152 residents67.68
  40. 4006039in Lakeville · 1,918 residents67.62
  41. 4106524in Bethany · 5,288 residents67.60
  42. 4206022in Collinsville · 100 residents67.58
  43. 4306069in Sharon · 2,601 residents67.50
  44. 4406084in Tolland · 14,823 residents67.50
  45. 4506068in Salisbury · 2,034 residents67.42
  46. 4606057in New Hartford · 6,363 residents67.37
  47. 4706061in Pine Meadow · 312 residents67.36
  48. 4806756in Goshen · 3,037 residents67.35
  49. 4906830in Greenwich · 24,880 residents67.30
  50. 5006119in West Hartford · 14,793 residents67.12
Open the full Connecticut ranking →One page, all 277 scored ZIPs — sortable by score, residents, or place

What the distribution shows

Across Connecticut’s 280 ZIP codes, the ZipVitals Score spans a wide range. 277 of them carry enough measured coverage across all nine health domains to enter the population-weighted composite above; the rest are held out rather than filled from a coarser geography.

Assembled from the same ZIP-level data as every per-ZIP page. Read the full method →

Where Connecticut stands, domain by domain

The ZipVitals Score above combines nine domains of health into one number. This is where Connecticut's ZIP codes sit against ZIP codes across the country on each of them, weighted by how many residents live in each one — strongest at the top.

Strongest domain

Healthcare Access · 81st

Weighted by residents, this state’s ZIP codes sit around the 81st percentile of US ZIP codes here — its highest of the nine scoring domains.

Weakest domain

Environmental Hazard · 30th

Weighted by residents, this state’s ZIP codes sit around the 30th percentile of US ZIP codes here — its lowest of the nine scoring domains.

Healthcare Access81
Preventive Care75
Disability75
Chronic Disease Burden73
Mental Health69
Climate / Disaster Risk69
Risk Behavior67
Social Need / SDOH55
Environmental Hazard30

Read each bar as a national percentile from 0 to 100. The dark line marks the national median: a bar past it means Connecticut's ZIP codes typically place above most ZIP codes in the country on that domain. A domain Connecticut cannot place honestly is shown greyed as "Not enough data" rather than given a number.

Each figure is the population-weighted average of this state's ZIP codes' standing on that domain, compared with the ZIP codes measured across all nine scoring domains — not with all US ZIP codes. A ZIP code counts toward a domain only if it carries enough measured data on it and enough of Connecticut's residents live in the ZIP codes that do; the rest are held out rather than filled in from a coarser geography. Read the full method →

Why this matters

The ZipVitals Score combines nine domains of health — from chronic disease and preventive care to environmental hazard, social need, and healthcare access — into one 0–100 index for each ZIP code, computed the same way everywhere from public federal and academic data. The Connecticut figures on this page are population-weighted rollups of those per-ZIP scores, so they describe Connecticut's residents rather than a coarser geography relabeled as the state.

A high score describes favorable documented conditions; it is not a claim about individual residents, and it does not capture everything that shapes a community's health. Where a ZIP code scores low, that pattern reflects structural conditions — investment, environment, and access — far more than the choices of the people who live there.