ZIP code
29575
in Surfside Beach, South CarolinaPopulation 20,721
58.53/ 100
Ranked #5,966 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 19%)
Ranked #49 of 417 South Carolina ZIPs (top 11.8%)
Ranked #3 of 15 Myrtle Beach-Conway-North Myrtle Beach, SC ZIPs (top 20%)
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.
Loneliness
26.6%
in the bottom 2.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST4thUS2ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who report feeling lonely.
Full methodology ›High cholesterol
46.8%
in the top 1.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST98thUS98thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with high cholesterol, among those who have ever been screened for it.
Full methodology ›Outer-floodplain exposure
9.5%
in the top 4.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST95thUS96thDefinition & source ›
The share of this ZIP’s land area inside FEMA’s 0.2%-annual-chance flood band — the “500-year” zone, a lower but real 1-in-500 yearly chance.
Measured from FEMA’s mapped flood panels. Where a panel has not been mapped, no value is published for that ZIP — those ZIPs are absent from this comparison rather than counted as unexposed.
Full methodology ›Walkability
140 intersections/sq mi
in the top 6.2% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST98thUS94thDefinition & source ›
The number of street intersections per square mile — a standard street-connectivity measure; denser networks correlate with more walkable neighborhoods.
Full methodology ›Colon-cancer screening
74.6%
in the top 3.7% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST93rdUS96thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults aged 45–75 who are up to date on colorectal-cancer screening.
Full methodology ›Natural-disaster risk
in the top 7.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST90thUS93rdDefinition & source ›
This area’s national rank on its single highest non-flood natural hazard — such as wildfire, tornado, or earthquake — in FEMA’s modeled National Risk Index; flooding is shown separately.
Full methodology ›Distance to a Superfund site
62.8 mi
in the top 8.1% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS92ndDefinition & source ›
The distance in miles from this ZIP’s edge to the nearest Superfund site — an abandoned or uncontrolled hazardous-waste site the EPA has listed for cleanup.
Full methodology ›Radon
0.6 pCi/L
in the bottom 1.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS1stDefinition & source ›
The modeled typical indoor radon level for this area, in picocuries per liter — the EPA recommends fixing a home at 4 pCi/L or above.
Modeled from indoor-radon measurements. In Alaska and Hawaii, where those measurements are not published, a US Geological Survey geologic radon-potential category stands in — a coarser input, disclosed rather than hidden.
Full methodology ›Energy-cost burden
1.6%
in the bottom 6.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST5thUS7thDefinition & 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 ›Grocery access
0.17 per 1,000 residents
in the top 9.9% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST84thUS90thDefinition & source ›
The number of full supermarkets inside this ZIP’s boundary, per 1,000 residents.
Counted from establishments located inside this ZIP’s boundary, so one just across the line is not counted. Where a ZIP has too few residents for the density to be reliable, no value is published rather than an unreliable one. ZipVitals’s food-access signal is derived from these in-ZIP densities — it is not USDA’s food-desert designation, which measures distance to the nearest supermarket. Where a leg is missing, a ZIP reads “not determinable,” never “not a food desert.”
Full methodology ›The read
In overall standing, Surfside Beach, South Carolina (ZIP 29575) comes out in the top 19% healthiest ZIPs nationally (5,966th) and the top 11.8% of South Carolina (49th).
Both sides of the picture show up plainly in this area's numbers: modeled loneliness lands in the bottom 2.1% nationally, walkability is in the top 6.2% nationally, and modeled colon screening resides in the top 3.7% nationally. Distance to a Superfund site rests in the top 8.1% nationally, modeled radon lies in the bottom 1.4% nationally, and modeled energy burden sits in the bottom 6.6% nationally. Grocery settles in the top 9.9% nationally. By contrast, modeled high cholesterol registers in the top 1.7% nationally, and outer-floodplain exposure stands in the top 4.0% nationally. Modeled disaster risk lands in the top 7.4% nationally.
Relative to the ZIPs around it, outer-floodplain exposure runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. In plain terms, disaster risk is the area's national rank on its highest non-flood peril in FEMA's modeled Risk Index, like wildfire or quake. Distance to a Superfund site is an abandoned or uncontrolled hazardous-waste site the EPA has identified for cleanup. Radon is a radioactive soil gas the EPA identifies as the top cause of lung cancer in nonsmokers. The nearest healthier ZIP overall is ZIP 29576, just across the boundary.
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 Myrtle Beach-Conway-North Myrtle Beach, SC metro area.
Compared with the ZIP codes measured across all nine scoring domains — not with all US ZIP codes.
Lifting this score
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 93%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 98%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 96%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 86%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 80%
8%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 75%
5%
About typical
Disability
healthier than 48%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 59%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 24%
21%
Lifting this score
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 95%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 99%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 96%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 94%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 89%
8%
Disability
healthier than 72%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
in the top 0.3%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 75%
5%
About typical
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 45%
21%
Nothing measured is holding this score back.
Lifting this score
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 86%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 71%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 86%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 86%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 71%
8%
Disability
healthier than 71%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
in the top 0.00%
5%
About typical
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 50%
21%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 50%
5%
Nothing measured is holding this score back.
“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
2 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.
Above its nearby ZIPs
The ZIP codes that outlive their neighbors
Estimated life expectancy is 78.7 ± 1.9 years. The 48 nearest ZIP codes with estimates average 75.3 years — 3.5 years above them.
Ranked #565 of the 3,687 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by years above the nearby-ZIP average, highest first.
Clean environment, heavy chronic burden
Where the environment and chronic illness point in opposite directions
Environmental-hazard standing 98.3 (top 10%); chronic-disease standing 24.5 — 74 points apart, cleaner on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #828 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
29576
South Carolinashares a border
Score 59.39
Closest healthier
29585
South Carolinaabout 5.1 mi away
Score 64.17
Similar health profile
28741
North Carolina97% similar profile
Score 60.14
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 | 37.0% | 34.4–39.7 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 44.4% | 41.5–47.5 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 13.6% | 12.4–14.8 |
| Current asthma among adults | 8.9% | 8.0–10.0 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 8.9% | 8.1–9.8 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 9.3% | 8.2–10.4 |
| Depression among adults | 20.9% | 18.6–23.5 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 15.3% | 13.7–17.1 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 46.8% | 43.8–50.0 |
| Obesity among adults | 30.6% | 27.0–34.5 |
| Stroke among adults | 4.5% | 4.1–4.9 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 9.6% | 7.9–11.4 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 9.3% | 8.0–10.7 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 86.3% | 84.3–88.1 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 84.6% | 82.5–86.6 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 90.9% | 89.8–92.0 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 74.6% | 71.3–77.6 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 68.4% | 65.6–70.9 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 78.3% | 73.1–82.6 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 13.6% | 11.7–15.7 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 13.0% | 11.2–14.9 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 23.5% | 20.7–26.6 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 31.4% | 28.0–34.8 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 19.3% | 17.2–21.6 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 14.7% | 13.2–16.4 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 15.7% | 14.1–17.5 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 12.2% | 10.9–13.7 |
| Any disability among adults | 31.6% | 28.6–34.8 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 9.5% | 8.5–10.5 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 8.0% | 7.1–8.9 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 17.2% | 15.3–19.2 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 4.1% | 3.7–4.5 |
| Vision disability among adults | 5.1% | 4.6–5.6 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 19.5% | 17.1–22.1 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 10.9% | 9.4–12.8 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 6.0% | 5.1–7.1 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 7.8% | 6.8–9.1 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 5.5% | 4.9–6.3 |
| Loneliness among adults | 26.6% | 23.6–29.9 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 5.1% | 4.5–5.9 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | SC median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 12.6% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 15.5% (6.2–28.7%) n=410 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 20.0% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 14.1% (5.9–25.5%) n=412 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 4.4% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 11.6% (3.4–21.1%) n=417 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 31.9% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 20.1% (9.1–48.9%) n=417 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 4.2% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.6% (0.2–11.1%) n=414 |
| Households without a vehicle | 5.6% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 4.8% (0.0–13.6%) n=410 |
| Broadband subscription | 89.7% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 86.1% (71.4–95.1%) n=410 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 25.4% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 23.3% (12.8–35.0%) n=410 |
| Homeownership rate | 79.6% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 77.3% (54.9–91.8%) n=410 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 0.6% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 1.4% (0.0–4.6%) n=410 |
| Foreign-born population | 7.1% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 2.7% (0.0–9.0%) n=419 |
| Single-parent households | 67.0% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 50.9% (37.6–69.9%) n=404 |
| Population 65+ | 30.4% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 19.6% (10.9–31.7%) n=419 |
| Median age | 55.5 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 41.4 yr (33.8–54.1) n=415 |
| Median household income | $71,447 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $58,990 ($40,800–$90,964) n=384 |
| Median home value | $305,700 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $177,400 ($88,260–$384,940) n=383 |
| Median gross rent | $1,305 | $1,021 ($677–$1,912) n=25,670 | $950 ($678–$1,545) n=343 |
Life expectancyNCHS / RWJF USALEEP · model-based
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | SC median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Life expectancy at birth | 78.7 yr ± 0.97 | 78.9 yr (74.7–82.8) n=31,308 | 76.3 yr (73.2–79.9) n=389 |
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 0.97 years of 78.7, 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