ZIP code
28205
in Charlotte, North CarolinaPopulation 51,806
54.61/ 100
Ranked #9,948 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 31%)
Ranked #235 of 793 North Carolina ZIPs (top 30%)
Ranked #43 of 113 Charlotte-Concord-Gastonia, NC-SC ZIPs (top 38%)
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.
High cholesterol
29.4%
in the bottom 2.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST4thUS3rdDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with high cholesterol, among those who have ever been screened for it.
Full methodology ›Subsidized affordable housing
644 units
in the top 3.2% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST96thUS97thDefinition & source ›
The number of affordable rental units in this ZIP supported by the federal Low-Income Housing Tax Credit program.
Full methodology ›Air-toxics cancer risk
40 per million
in the top 4.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST98thUS96thDefinition & source ›
The EPA’s modeled estimate of added lifetime cancer risk from breathing outdoor air toxics, in cases per million people exposed over a lifetime.
Full methodology ›Lead in tap water
0 ppb
at the national minimum
Lower is healthier
US1stDefinition & source ›
The lead level at the 90th percentile of tap-water samples reported by the public water systems serving this ZIP, in parts per billion — the EPA requires action above 15 ppb.
Measured from EPA records for the public water systems that serve this ZIP. Households on private wells — roughly 30% of the US population — are not covered by this measure, and this figure says nothing about their water.
Full methodology ›Homeownership rate
42.5%
in the bottom 6.0% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST5thUS6thDefinition & source ›
The share of occupied homes that are owned, rather than rented, by the people living in them.
Full methodology ›Coronary heart disease
4.5%
in the bottom 5.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST5thUS6thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have coronary heart disease or angina.
Full methodology ›Industrial-pollution burden
in the top 8.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST94thUS92ndDefinition & source ›
The EPA’s modeled screening score for industrial chemical releases, weighting the amounts released by their toxicity and how many people live nearby — a relative comparison score, not a measured exposure.
Full methodology ›High blood pressure
28.6%
in the bottom 7.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST4thUS7thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have high blood pressure.
Full methodology ›Hearing disability
5.3%
in the bottom 9.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST6thUS9thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who are deaf or have serious difficulty hearing.
Full methodology ›Energy-cost burden
1.7%
in the bottom 7.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST9thUS8thDefinition & 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
By the composite health measure, ZIP 28205, one of several in Charlotte, North Carolina ranks in the top 31% healthiest ZIPs nationally (9,948th) and the top 30% of North Carolina (235th).
The measures that set this area apart are worth putting up front: modeled high cholesterol lies in the bottom 2.9% nationally, and subsidized affordable housing lands in the top 3.2% nationally. Lead in tap water sits at the national minimum, and modeled coronary heart disease is in the bottom 5.7% nationally. Modeled high blood pressure settles in the bottom 7.3% nationally, hearing disability resides in the bottom 9.0% nationally, and energy burden registers in the bottom 7.6% nationally. Set against that, modeled air-toxics cancer risk rests in the top 4.5% nationally, homeownership stands in the bottom 6.0% nationally, and modeled industrial-pollution burden lies in the top 8.0% nationally.
To spell things out, air-toxics cancer risk is a modeled EPA estimate of added lifetime cancer risk from breathing outdoor air, per million people. Lead in tap water is the EPA trigger, 15 parts per billion in tap samples, above which a water system must act on lead. Industrial-pollution burden is the EPA's modeled screening score weighting industrial chemical releases by their toxicity and how many people live nearby. Close by, ZIP 28204, just across the boundary, ranks healthier overall.
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 Charlotte-Concord-Gastonia, NC-SC 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 90%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 68%
16%
Disability
healthier than 65%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 92%
5%
About typical
Risk Behavior
healthier than 48%
11%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 45%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 33%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 18%
13%
Mental Health
healthier than 31%
8%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 93%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 68%
16%
Disability
healthier than 80%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 61%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 89%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 18%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 4%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 27%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 40%
8%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 85%
21%
Disability
healthier than 65%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 73%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 87%
5%
About typical
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 56%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 44%
14%
Holding it back
Preventive Care
healthier than 4%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 28%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 33%
8%
“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
4 of our published findings list 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.
Below what income predicts
The ZIP codes that outlive their incomes
Estimated life expectancy is 77.0 ± 1.3 years. A median household income of $75,622 predicts 79.0 years — 2.0 years below.
Ranked #2,681 of the 5,842 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by years above what income predicts, highest first.
Below its nearby ZIPs
The ZIP codes that outlive their neighbors
Estimated life expectancy is 77.0 ± 1.3 years. The 36 nearest ZIP codes with estimates average 78.8 years — 1.9 years below them.
Ranked #1,532 of the 3,687 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by years above the nearby-ZIP average, highest first.
Heavy environment, light chronic burden
Where the environment and chronic illness point in opposite directions
Environmental-hazard standing 33.4; chronic-disease standing 89.8 — 56 points apart, heavier on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #15,041 of the 18,187 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by the gap from cleanest environment to heaviest chronic burden, highest first.
Highest-risk tenth
Air toxics and the years between the two ends of the risk scale
Modeled air-toxics cancer risk is 40.0 cases per million — among the tenth of compared ZIP codes with the most. Estimated life expectancy is 77.0 ± 1.3 years.
Ranked #504 of the 4,173 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by modeled air-toxics risk, highest first.
Nearby & similar ZIPs
Editorially selected — see how this ZIP compares to nearby and similar places.
Nearby
28204
North Carolinashares a border
Score 68.55
Closest healthier
28207
North Carolinashares a border
Score 72.78
Similar health profile
52240
Iowa97% similar profile
Score 54.44
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 | 19.7% | 17.3–22.1 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 28.6% | 25.4–31.8 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 5.0% | 4.5–5.6 |
| Current asthma among adults | 10.7% | 9.4–12.0 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 4.5% | 4.1–5.0 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 5.5% | 4.9–6.2 |
| Depression among adults | 25.0% | 21.5–28.4 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 9.6% | 8.3–10.9 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 29.4% | 25.9–32.7 |
| Obesity among adults | 30.9% | 25.7–36.0 |
| Stroke among adults | 2.8% | 2.6–3.0 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 18.0% | 14.9–21.2 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 13.3% | 11.6–15.0 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 69.4% | 66.0–72.4 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 75.4% | 71.7–78.8 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 84.5% | 82.4–86.4 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 60.5% | 55.5–65.1 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 57.4% | 53.9–60.7 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 77.1% | 69.8–83.1 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 17.0% | 14.2–20.0 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 13.2% | 11.4–15.3 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 22.9% | 19.5–26.4 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 39.2% | 34.4–44.0 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 18.3% | 16.1–20.6 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 17.6% | 15.6–19.7 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 11.5% | 10.1–13.0 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 15.9% | 14.1–17.8 |
| Any disability among adults | 29.5% | 25.9–33.1 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 5.3% | 4.6–5.9 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 8.2% | 7.3–9.2 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 11.5% | 10.0–13.0 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 3.8% | 3.5–4.2 |
| Vision disability among adults | 5.5% | 5.1–6.1 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 24.2% | 21.0–27.8 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 19.1% | 17.0–21.6 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 15.8% | 14.0–17.9 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 15.5% | 13.6–17.6 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 10.2% | 9.1–11.5 |
| Loneliness among adults | 33.7% | 29.3–38.5 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 10.4% | 9.1–11.8 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | NC median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 16.5% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 13.0% (4.4–25.0%) n=793 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 22.2% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 14.5% (5.7–24.9%) n=794 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 15.5% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 10.4% (3.1–19.8%) n=798 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 47.8% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 22.8% (10.7–53.4%) n=798 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 5.3% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.2% (0.0–9.1%) n=796 |
| Households without a vehicle | 8.0% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 3.9% (0.0–10.2%) n=793 |
| Broadband subscription | 92.9% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 87.6% (76.2–96.3%) n=793 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 34.1% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 24.7% (14.1–36.5%) n=793 |
| Homeownership rate | 42.5% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 75.0% (52.7–89.7%) n=793 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 3.6% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 1.4% (0.0–4.5%) n=793 |
| Foreign-born population | 21.0% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 4.2% (0.0–12.9%) n=799 |
| Single-parent households | 44.1% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 51.8% (39.2–70.1%) n=790 |
| Population 65+ | 8.9% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 19.7% (11.1–31.9%) n=799 |
| Median age | 34.2 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 42.5 yr (33.3–55.7) n=797 |
| Median household income | $75,622 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $65,030 ($44,419–$97,111) n=749 |
| Median home value | $457,200 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $223,850 ($113,970–$452,990) n=758 |
| Median gross rent | $1,460 | $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 | 76.9 yr ± 0.66 | 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 0.66 years of 76.9, 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