ZIP code
27519
in Cary, North CarolinaPopulation 69,836
74.11/ 100
Ranked #82 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 0.3%)
Ranked #2 of 793 North Carolina ZIPs (top 0.3%)
Ranked #2 of 48 Raleigh-Cary, NC ZIPs (top 4.2%)
Ranks are modeled estimates — ZIPs a few hundred places apart are effectively tied.
What defines this ZIP
Metrics where this ZIP sits in the tails of the national distribution — the ones that most set it apart. Select any tile for its definition and methodology.
Median household income
$165,586
in the top 2.5% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS98thDefinition & source ›
The middle household income in this ZIP — half of households earn more, half earn less — in dollars per year.
Full methodology ›Obesity
22.7%
in the bottom 2.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS3rdDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with obesity, defined as a body-mass index of 30 or higher.
Full methodology ›Housing insecurity
5.7%
in the bottom 1.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST2ndUS2ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who experienced housing insecurity in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Lack of transportation
4.1%
in the bottom 1.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS2ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who lacked reliable transportation in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Utility shut-off threat
3.6%
in the bottom 2.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS2ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults whose household was threatened with a utility shut-off in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Independent-living disability
3.9%
in the bottom 0.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS1stDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have difficulty doing errands alone, such as visiting a doctor’s office, because of a physical, mental, or emotional condition.
Full methodology ›Coronary heart disease
3.5%
in the bottom 2.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST2ndUS2ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have coronary heart disease or angina.
Full methodology ›Mobility disability
6.8%
in the bottom 1.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST2ndUS2ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with serious difficulty walking or climbing stairs.
Full methodology ›Food insecurity
6.7%
in the bottom 2.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST2ndUS3rdDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who experienced food insecurity in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Cognitive disability
8.4%
in the bottom 1.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS1stDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with serious difficulty concentrating, remembering, or making decisions.
Full methodology ›The read
On the composite measure, ZIP 27519, one of several in Cary, North Carolina stands in the top 0.3% healthiest ZIPs nationally (82nd) and the top 0.3% of North Carolina (2nd).
A balanced set of signals defines this area, not any single one: household income settles in the top 2.5% nationally, and modeled obesity rests in the bottom 2.7% nationally. Modeled housing insecurity lands in the bottom 1.9% nationally, and transportation settles in the bottom 1.9% nationally. Modeled utility shutoff rests in the bottom 2.0% nationally, independent living disability lands in the bottom 0.2% nationally, and coronary heart disease settles in the bottom 2.1% nationally. Modeled mobility disability rests in the bottom 1.8% nationally, food insecurity lands in the bottom 2.9% nationally, and cognitive disability settles in the bottom 1.1% nationally.
Set beside the wider area around it, park land runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. ZIP 27560, just across the boundary, ranks better overall among the ZIPs nearby.
What’s driving this score
Nine domains make up the ZipVitals Score — here is how this ZIP does on each, and how much each one counts. Compare it against the US, this state and the Raleigh-Cary, NC metro area.
Compared with the ZIP codes measured across all nine scoring domains — not with all US ZIP codes.
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 98%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 98%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 84%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 99%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 95%
8%
Disability
in the top 0.5%
7%
About typical
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 43%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 54%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 34%
14%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 98%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 98%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 80%
13%
Risk Behavior
in the top 0.8%
11%
Mental Health
in the top 0.00%
8%
Disability
in the top 0.2%
7%
About typical
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 56%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 43%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 18%
14%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 96%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 91%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 79%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 98%
11%
Mental Health
in the top 0.00%
8%
Disability
healthier than 98%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 64%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 15%
14%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 30%
5%
“Share” is how much of this ZIP’s score the domain accounts for. Percentages are rounded; higher is healthier in every domain. How the score works, and who it compares you with ›
Findings that name this ZIP
One of our published findings lists this ZIP code. Each finding compares one published measure against a stated benchmark, and names only the ZIP codes whose estimates are reliable enough to rank. See all surprising findings.
Heavy environment, light chronic burden
Where the environment and chronic illness point in opposite directions
Environmental-hazard standing 36.2; chronic-disease standing 97.7 (top 10%) — 62 points apart, heavier on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #15,563 of the 18,187 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by the gap from cleanest environment to heaviest chronic burden, highest first.
Nearby & similar ZIPs
Editorially selected — see how this ZIP compares to nearby and similar places.
Nearby
27513
North Carolinashares a border
Score 69.33
Closest healthier
27560
North Carolinashares a border
Score 74.64
Similar health profile
30033
Georgia100% similar profile
Score 68.52
How these were chosen: only ZIPs with a published Score appear — a nearby ZIP with too little data to score won’t. Nearby means closest by distance between ZIP boundaries, which can cross state lines. A similar health profile is a close match across the nine Score domains, not similar demographics. Distances are measured between ZIP boundaries — ZIPs that touch share a border. How distance is measured
Evidence
Every measure this page draws on, by source. Collapsed by default — the full data stays in the page for search engines either way.
Health OutcomesCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Arthritis among adults | 17.9% | 16.0–19.9 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 27.7% | 25.0–30.7 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 6.1% | 5.6–6.7 |
| Current asthma among adults | 8.5% | 7.5–9.5 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 3.5% | 3.2–3.9 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 3.0% | 2.7–3.4 |
| Depression among adults | 19.4% | 16.9–21.9 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 8.1% | 7.1–9.2 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 34.1% | 30.9–37.4 |
| Obesity among adults | 22.7% | 19.4–26.3 |
| Stroke among adults | 1.9% | 1.8–2.0 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 4.8% | 4.0–5.7 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 5.0% | 4.3–5.9 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 73.0% | 69.8–76.2 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 80.7% | 77.9–83.4 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 91.1% | 89.8–92.3 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 62.8% | 59.0–66.8 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 73.9% | 71.3–76.3 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 80.8% | 75.7–85.4 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 13.5% | 11.4–15.8 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 6.7% | 5.7–7.8 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 14.8% | 12.6–17.1 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 30.4% | 26.8–34.4 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 9.9% | 8.7–11.2 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 11.6% | 10.3–13.0 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 7.3% | 6.5–8.2 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 8.4% | 7.4–9.4 |
| Any disability among adults | 17.7% | 15.5–20.0 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 4.3% | 3.9–4.8 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 3.9% | 3.5–4.3 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 6.8% | 5.9–7.6 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 1.8% | 1.6–1.9 |
| Vision disability among adults | 2.5% | 2.3–2.8 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 20.0% | 17.5–22.9 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 6.7% | 5.7–7.8 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 3.8% | 3.2–4.5 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 5.7% | 4.9–6.7 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 4.1% | 3.6–4.6 |
| Loneliness among adults | 29.5% | 26.0–33.3 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 3.6% | 3.1–4.1 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | NC median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 4.4% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 13.0% (4.4–25.0%) n=793 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 3.8% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 14.5% (5.7–24.9%) n=794 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 2.7% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 10.4% (3.1–19.8%) n=798 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 78.3% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 22.8% (10.7–53.4%) n=798 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 3.7% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.2% (0.0–9.1%) n=796 |
| Households without a vehicle | 2.3% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 3.9% (0.0–10.2%) n=793 |
| Broadband subscription | 97.3% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 87.6% (76.2–96.3%) n=793 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 19.2% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 24.7% (14.1–36.5%) n=793 |
| Homeownership rate | 69.1% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 75.0% (52.7–89.7%) n=793 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 2.0% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 1.4% (0.0–4.5%) n=793 |
| Foreign-born population | 32.7% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 4.2% (0.0–12.9%) n=799 |
| Single-parent households | 40.4% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 51.8% (39.2–70.1%) n=790 |
| Population 65+ | 10.3% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 19.7% (11.1–31.9%) n=799 |
| Median age | 38.4 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 42.5 yr (33.3–55.7) n=797 |
| Median household income | $165,586 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $65,030 ($44,419–$97,111) n=749 |
| Median home value | $670,900 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $223,850 ($113,970–$452,990) n=758 |
| Median gross rent | $1,952 | $1,021 ($677–$1,912) n=25,670 | $957 ($715–$1,575) n=687 |
Life expectancyNCHS / RWJF USALEEP · model-based
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | NC median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Life expectancy at birth | 81.7 yr ± 0.75 | 78.9 yr (74.7–82.8) n=31,308 | 77.3 yr (74.6–80.8) n=747 |
About the ± — it’s this estimate’s give-or-take (statisticians call it the standard error). The true life expectancy for this ZIP most likely falls within 0.75 years of 81.7, and it’s very unlikely to be off by more than twice that.
More ZIPs to explore ▾More ZIPs to explore ▴
How these lists were built: they draw only from ZIPs that have a published Score, so ZIPs with too little data to score are not listed. Distance-based lists use distance between ZIP boundaries with no state filter, so an out-of-state ZIP can appear. Statistically similar means a close match across the nine Score domains, not a demographic match: the measure is the cosine similarity between two ZIPs’ domain scores, taken over the domains both ZIPs have data for and only where that overlap covers at least six of the nine — and where no ZIP clears that minimum-overlap floor, that list is left out rather than filled with a weak match. How distance is measured