ZIP code
46077
in Zionsville, IndianaPopulation 36,760
68.24/ 100
Ranked #964 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 3.1%)
Ranked #5 of 757 Indiana ZIPs (top 0.7%)
Ranked #5 of 115 Indianapolis-Carmel-Greenwood, IN ZIPs (top 4.4%)
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
$177,679
in the top 1.9% 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 ›Arsenic in groundwater
42.2%
in the top 1.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST95thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The modeled probability that untreated groundwater in this area — the source private wells draw on — exceeds the federal arsenic limit of 10 micrograms per liter.
A modeled likelihood for untreated groundwater, the source drawn on by private wells, which are federally unregulated. It is not a measurement of treated water delivered by a public system, and it is not a test of any individual well.
Full methodology ›Loneliness
26.3%
in the bottom 1.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS1stDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who report feeling lonely.
Full methodology ›Lack of transportation
4.0%
in the bottom 1.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS2ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who lacked reliable transportation in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Distance to a Superfund site
In this ZIP
at the national minimum
Higher is healthier
ST1stUS1stDefinition & 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 ›Food insecurity
6.3%
in the bottom 2.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS2ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who experienced food insecurity in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Housing insecurity
5.9%
in the bottom 2.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS2ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who experienced housing insecurity in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Independent-living disability
4.5%
in the bottom 1.0% 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 ›Lithium in drinking water
9.6 µg/L
in the bottom 4.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST17thUS4thDefinition & source ›
The average detected level of lithium — a natural trace metal with no federal drinking-water limit yet — across the public water systems serving this ZIP, in micrograms per liter.
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 ›Cognitive disability
9.5%
in the bottom 3.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS3rdDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with serious difficulty concentrating, remembering, or making decisions.
Full methodology ›The read
Zionsville, Indiana (ZIP 46077), by its overall standing, sits in the top 3.1% healthiest ZIPs nationally (964th) and the top 0.7% of Indiana (5th).
The profile opens balanced, with readings on either hand: household income lies in the top 1.9% nationally, modeled loneliness sits in the bottom 1.5% nationally, and modeled transportation settles in the bottom 1.6% nationally. Modeled food insecurity registers in the bottom 2.0% nationally, housing insecurity stands in the bottom 2.4% nationally, and independent living disability lands in the bottom 1.0% nationally. Lithium in drinking water is in the bottom 4.3% nationally, and modeled cognitive disability resides in the bottom 3.3% nationally. By contrast, modeled arsenic rests in the top 1.4% nationally, and distance to a Superfund site lies at the national minimum.
Held up against its neighbors, arsenic runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. Defined in plain terms, arsenic is a natural groundwater contaminant, here a modeled estimate of the chance private-well levels exceed a benchmark. Distance to a Superfund site is an abandoned or uncontrolled hazardous-waste site the EPA has identified for cleanup. Lithium in drinking water is a natural metal that dissolves into some groundwater and has no federal drinking-water limit yet. The nearest ZIP ranking healthier overall is ZIP 46032, 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 Indianapolis-Carmel-Greenwood, IN 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 89%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 98%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 92%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 94%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 88%
8%
Disability
healthier than 98%
7%
About typical
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 57%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 58%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 18%
14%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 98%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
in the top 0.7%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 98%
13%
Risk Behavior
in the top 0.6%
11%
Mental Health
in the top 0.6%
8%
Disability
in the top 0.00%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 61%
5%
About typical
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 44%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 24%
14%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 96%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 96%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 94%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 97%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 98%
8%
Disability
in the top 0.00%
7%
About typical
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 48%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 31%
14%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 36%
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
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 81.5 ± 1.4 years. The 49 nearest ZIP codes with estimates average 78.0 years — 3.4 years above them.
Ranked #588 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 17.7; chronic-disease standing 88.7 — 71 points apart, heavier on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #16,484 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
46032
Indianashares a border
Score 68.59
Closest healthier
46290
Indianaabout 2.9 mi away
Score 69.67
Similar health profile
03087
New Hampshire99% similar profile
Score 68.57
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 | 23.0% | 20.8–26.1 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 31.0% | 28.2–35.0 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 8.3% | 7.6–9.1 |
| Current asthma among adults | 10.1% | 9.1–11.4 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 4.4% | 4.0–5.0 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 4.4% | 3.9–5.1 |
| Depression among adults | 20.6% | 18.2–24.0 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 9.2% | 8.1–10.7 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 36.2% | 33.0–40.5 |
| Obesity among adults | 31.0% | 26.4–37.8 |
| Stroke among adults | 2.2% | 2.0–2.4 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 7.0% | 5.7–8.4 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 4.2% | 3.6–5.1 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 76.5% | 73.9–79.7 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 81.4% | 78.9–84.4 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 90.4% | 89.3–91.6 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 69.9% | 65.5–73.7 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 74.4% | 71.6–77.0 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 79.4% | 73.0–84.6 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 17.0% | 14.6–20.4 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 8.9% | 7.5–10.6 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 15.3% | 13.0–18.6 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 30.3% | 25.3–35.5 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 11.9% | 10.4–13.9 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 13.3% | 11.9–15.1 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 9.6% | 8.5–10.9 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 9.5% | 8.4–10.9 |
| Any disability among adults | 20.5% | 18.0–23.9 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 4.9% | 4.4–5.6 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 4.5% | 4.0–5.2 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 8.4% | 7.3–9.8 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 2.0% | 1.8–2.3 |
| Vision disability among adults | 2.6% | 2.3–2.9 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 18.2% | 15.7–21.0 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 6.3% | 5.3–7.6 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 2.9% | 2.4–3.6 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 5.9% | 4.9–6.9 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 4.0% | 3.4–4.5 |
| Loneliness among adults | 26.3% | 22.6–30.4 |
| 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) | IN median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 2.8% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 9.8% (3.3–23.6%) n=764 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 4.1% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 8.3% (2.5–19.0%) n=761 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 1.3% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 8.8% (3.0–19.3%) n=766 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 74.1% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 19.4% (8.1–38.5%) n=766 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 2.5% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 3.4% (0.0–8.2%) n=760 |
| Households without a vehicle | 1.5% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 3.6% (0.0–11.5%) n=764 |
| Broadband subscription | 96.3% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 88.8% (76.7–95.9%) n=764 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 16.9% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 20.0% (9.8–33.1%) n=764 |
| Homeownership rate | 83.1% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 81.7% (58.9–94.5%) n=764 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 0.0% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 1.1% (0.0–4.2%) n=764 |
| Foreign-born population | 7.6% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 1.3% (0.0–8.8%) n=767 |
| Single-parent households | 49.1% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 53.2% (40.5–69.1%) n=756 |
| Population 65+ | 12.9% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 18.2% (11.0–26.5%) n=767 |
| Median age | 40.6 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 40.5 yr (32.5–49.6) n=756 |
| Median household income | $177,679 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $71,016 ($50,417–$99,531) n=721 |
| Median home value | $580,600 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $178,250 ($109,430–$287,310) n=724 |
| Median gross rent | $1,795 | $1,021 ($677–$1,912) n=25,670 | $925 ($704–$1,261) n=640 |
Life expectancyNCHS / RWJF USALEEP · model-based
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | IN median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Life expectancy at birth | 81.5 yr ± 0.69 | 78.9 yr (74.7–82.8) n=31,308 | 78.5 yr (75.1–81.5) n=754 |
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 0.69 years of 81.5, 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