ZIP code
27613
in Raleigh, North CarolinaPopulation 45,235
70.19/ 100
Ranked #558 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 1.8%)
Ranked #6 of 793 North Carolina ZIPs (top 0.8%)
Ranked #5 of 48 Raleigh-Cary, NC ZIPs (top 10.5%)
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.
Food insecurity
6.9%
in the bottom 3.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST2ndUS3rdDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who experienced food insecurity in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Lack of transportation
4.6%
in the bottom 4.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST3rdUS4thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who lacked reliable transportation in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Fair or poor health
10.9%
in the bottom 1.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS2ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who rate their own general health as fair or poor.
Full methodology ›Mobility disability
7.9%
in the bottom 3.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST3rdUS3rdDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with serious difficulty walking or climbing stairs.
Full methodology ›Independent-living disability
4.7%
in the bottom 1.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS2ndDefinition & 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 ›Housing insecurity
6.6%
in the bottom 4.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST4thUS5thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who experienced housing insecurity in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Coronary heart disease
4.1%
in the bottom 3.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST4thUS4thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have coronary heart disease or angina.
Full methodology ›Utility shut-off threat
4.3%
in the bottom 5.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST4thUS6thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults whose household was threatened with a utility shut-off in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Stroke
2.2%
in the bottom 3.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST4thUS3rdDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have had a stroke.
Full methodology ›Energy-cost burden
1.3%
in the bottom 2.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST3rdUS3rdDefinition & source ›
The modeled share of household income spent on home energy bills — electricity, gas, and heating fuels.
A modeled share of household income spent on home energy. Estimates that hit the model’s 100% ceiling are suppressed rather than published, because at that point the figure reflects the model’s limit rather than a measured burden.
Full methodology ›The read
On balance, and by the composite measure, ZIP 27613, one of several in Raleigh, North Carolina ranks in the top 1.8% healthiest ZIPs nationally (558th) and the top 0.8% of North Carolina (6th).
A number of signals point in a favorable direction for this area: modeled food insecurity resides in the bottom 3.3% nationally, and transportation lands in the bottom 4.4% nationally. Modeled fair or poor health registers in the bottom 1.6% nationally, and mobility disability sits in the bottom 3.0% nationally. Modeled independent living disability rests in the bottom 1.6% nationally, housing insecurity is in the bottom 4.9% nationally, and coronary heart disease stands in the bottom 3.7% nationally. Modeled utility shutoff settles in the bottom 5.7% nationally, stroke lies in the bottom 3.5% nationally, and energy burden resides in the bottom 2.9% nationally.
Compared with the ZIPs it borders, park land runs far lower than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. In plainer terms, energy burden is the share of household income that goes to home energy bills. For a healthier nearby ZIP overall, look to ZIP 27560, about 1.1 miles away. The area additionally sits on the healthier half of the national range on at least seven of the ten good-life measures tracked here, from quiet and green space to nearby care, a combination reached by about one in twenty-five US ZIP codes.
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 94%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 97%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 81%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 89%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 97%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 75%
8%
Disability
healthier than 97%
7%
About typical
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 50%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 57%
5%
Nothing measured is holding this score back.
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 96%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 97%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 67%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 87%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 97%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 94%
8%
Disability
healthier than 99%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 75%
5%
About typical
Healthcare Access
healthier than 47%
5%
Nothing measured is holding this score back.
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 74%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 85%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 91%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 91%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 85%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 85%
8%
Disability
healthier than 89%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 91%
5%
Holding it back
Healthcare Access
healthier than 34%
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 ›
Nearby & similar ZIPs
Editorially selected — see how this ZIP compares to nearby and similar places.
Nearby
27587
North Carolinashares a border
Score 65.19
Closest healthier
27560
North Carolinaabout 1.1 mi away
Score 74.64
Similar health profile
20132
Virginia99% similar profile
Score 67.61
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 | 21.2% | 18.8–23.6 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 29.9% | 26.9–32.9 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 7.7% | 7.0–8.4 |
| Current asthma among adults | 9.9% | 8.8–11.1 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 4.1% | 3.7–4.6 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 3.8% | 3.4–4.3 |
| Depression among adults | 23.6% | 20.7–26.7 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 7.9% | 6.9–9.0 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 34.0% | 30.7–37.4 |
| Obesity among adults | 27.4% | 23.4–31.7 |
| Stroke among adults | 2.2% | 2.0–2.3 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 5.5% | 4.4–6.7 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 5.8% | 5.0–6.7 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 73.6% | 70.3–76.7 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 80.6% | 77.7–83.3 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 90.7% | 89.4–91.9 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 69.6% | 65.7–73.4 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 75.3% | 72.7–77.8 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 79.6% | 73.8–84.7 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 15.9% | 13.5–18.6 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 7.7% | 6.7–8.8 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 14.3% | 12.2–16.6 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 29.3% | 25.6–33.2 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 10.9% | 9.5–12.3 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 13.6% | 12.1–15.2 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 8.4% | 7.4–9.4 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 10.1% | 9.0–11.4 |
| Any disability among adults | 20.7% | 18.2–23.3 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 5.0% | 4.4–5.6 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 4.7% | 4.2–5.3 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 7.9% | 6.9–9.0 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 2.1% | 1.9–2.3 |
| Vision disability among adults | 2.8% | 2.6–3.0 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 17.8% | 15.3–20.4 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 6.9% | 5.9–8.0 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 4.7% | 4.0–5.5 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 6.6% | 5.7–7.6 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 4.6% | 4.0–5.2 |
| Loneliness among adults | 29.3% | 25.7–33.2 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 4.3% | 3.7–5.0 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | NC median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 4.8% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 13.0% (4.4–25.0%) n=793 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 4.6% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 14.5% (5.7–24.9%) n=794 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 2.6% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 10.4% (3.1–19.8%) n=798 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 69.6% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 22.8% (10.7–53.4%) n=798 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 2.4% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.2% (0.0–9.1%) n=796 |
| Households without a vehicle | 3.0% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 3.9% (0.0–10.2%) n=793 |
| Broadband subscription | 97.2% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 87.6% (76.2–96.3%) n=793 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 23.4% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 24.7% (14.1–36.5%) n=793 |
| Homeownership rate | 69.8% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 75.0% (52.7–89.7%) n=793 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 0.4% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 1.4% (0.0–4.5%) n=793 |
| Foreign-born population | 11.5% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 4.2% (0.0–12.9%) n=799 |
| Single-parent households | 50.4% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 51.8% (39.2–70.1%) n=790 |
| Population 65+ | 15.6% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 19.7% (11.1–31.9%) n=799 |
| Median age | 41.2 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 42.5 yr (33.3–55.7) n=797 |
| Median household income | $123,966 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $65,030 ($44,419–$97,111) n=749 |
| Median home value | $520,600 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $223,850 ($113,970–$452,990) n=758 |
| Median gross rent | $1,628 | $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 | 81.4 yr ± 0.95 | 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 0.95 years of 81.4, 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