Skip to main content
ZipVitals

ZIP code

53202

in Milwaukee, WisconsinPopulation 25,861

62.82/ 100

Ranked #3,073 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 9.6%)

Ranked #51 of 763 Wisconsin ZIPs (top 6.7%)

Ranked #27 of 80 Milwaukee-Waukesha, WI ZIPs (top 34%)

Ranks are modeled estimates — ZIPs a few hundred places apart are effectively tied.

Broad coverage across health domains

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

25.9%

in the bottom 1.5% nationally

Lower is healthier

ST1st
US1st
Definition & source ›

The estimated share of adults with high cholesterol, among those who have ever been screened for it.

Full methodology ›

Binge drinking

22.7%

in the top 1.3% nationally

Lower is healthier

ST99th
US99th
Definition & source ›

The estimated share of adults who report binge drinking — five or more drinks on one occasion for men, four or more for women.

Full methodology ›

Recreation access

1.9 per 1,000 residents

in the top 1.9% nationally

Higher is healthier

ST98th
US98th
Definition & source ›

The number of places for physical recreation — gyms, sports, and fitness venues — 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.

Full methodology ›

High blood pressure

23.5%

in the bottom 2.1% nationally

Lower is healthier

ST1st
US2nd
Definition & source ›

The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have high blood pressure.

Full methodology ›

Homeownership rate

21.4%

in the bottom 2.1% nationally

Higher is healthier

ST1st
US2nd
Definition & source ›

The share of occupied homes that are owned, rather than rented, by the people living in them.

Full methodology ›

Expected annual disaster loss

$0

in the top 2.7% nationally

Lower is healthier

ST96th
US97th
Definition & source ›

FEMA’s modeled estimate, in dollars per year, of the average harm to people expected from natural hazards — an annualized average, not a forecast for any single year.

Full methodology ›

Mammography

83.9%

in the top 1.4% nationally

Higher is healthier

ST97th
US99th
Definition & source ›

The estimated share of women aged 50–74 who had a mammogram within the past two years.

Full methodology ›

Civic-institution access

1.2 per 1,000 residents

in the top 3.0% nationally

Higher is healthier

ST99th
US97th
Definition & source ›

The number of civic and social organizations 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.

Full methodology ›

Coronary heart disease

3.7%

in the bottom 2.5% nationally

Lower is healthier

ST1st
US2nd
Definition & 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 3.5% nationally

Lower is healthier

ST98th
US97th
Definition & 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 ›

The read

In overall standing, ZIP 53202, one of several in Milwaukee, Wisconsin comes out in the top 9.6% healthiest ZIPs nationally (3,073rd) and the top 6.7% of Wisconsin (51st), based on limited data; treat as directional.

continue reading

Both sides of the picture show up plainly in this area's numbers: modeled high cholesterol stands in the bottom 1.5% nationally, recreation lands in the top 1.9% nationally, and modeled high blood pressure is in the bottom 2.1% nationally. Modeled mammography resides in the top 1.4% nationally, civic rests in the top 3.0% nationally, and modeled coronary heart disease lies in the bottom 2.5% nationally. By contrast, modeled binge drinking sits in the top 1.3% nationally, and homeownership settles in the bottom 2.1% nationally. Modeled expected annual loss registers in the top 2.7% nationally, and industrial-pollution burden stands in the top 3.5% nationally.

Relative to the ZIPs around it, industrial-pollution burden runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. In plain terms, expected annual loss is FEMA's modeled estimate, in dollars, of average yearly harm to people from natural hazards. Industrial-pollution burden is the EPA's modeled screening score weighting industrial chemical releases by their toxicity and how many people live nearby. The nearest healthier ZIP overall is ZIP 53217, about 2.7 miles away.

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 Milwaukee-Waukesha, WI metro area.

Compared with the ZIP codes measured across all nine scoring domains — not with all US ZIP codes.

Compare within

Lifting this score

Chronic Disease Burden

healthier than 97%

21%

Social Need / SDOH

healthier than 86%

16%

Risk Behavior

healthier than 71%

11%

Disability

healthier than 93%

7%

Healthcare Access

healthier than 86%

5%

About typical

Preventive Care

healthier than 58%

13%

Holding it back

Environmental Hazard

healthier than 7%

14%

Mental Health

healthier than 33%

8%

Not placed: Climate / Disaster Risk — too little of each is measured here to compare reliably. They still count toward the score (together 5% of it); we just will not publish a standing we cannot stand behind.

Lifting this score

Chronic Disease Burden

in the top 0.7%

21%

Social Need / SDOH

healthier than 87%

16%

Risk Behavior

healthier than 89%

11%

Disability

healthier than 98%

7%

Healthcare Access

healthier than 92%

5%

Holding it back

Environmental Hazard

healthier than 5%

14%

Preventive Care

healthier than 22%

13%

Mental Health

healthier than 8%

8%

Not placed: Climate / Disaster Risk — too little of each is measured here to compare reliably. They still count toward the score (together 5% of it); we just will not publish a standing we cannot stand behind.

Lifting this score

Chronic Disease Burden

in the top 0.00%

21%

Risk Behavior

healthier than 74%

11%

Disability

healthier than 94%

7%

Healthcare Access

healthier than 86%

5%

About typical

Social Need / SDOH

healthier than 44%

16%

Holding it back

Environmental Hazard

healthier than 22%

14%

Preventive Care

healthier than 18%

13%

Mental Health

healthier than 15%

8%

Not placed: Climate / Disaster Risk — too little of each is measured here to compare reliably. They still count toward the score (together 5% of it); we just will not publish a standing we cannot stand behind.

“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.

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
MeasureCrude prevalence95% CI
Arthritis among adults16.5%15.3–17.8
High blood pressure among adults23.5%21.8–25.2
Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults5.3%4.9–5.8
Current asthma among adults10.9%9.8–12.0
Coronary heart disease among adults3.7%3.3–4.0
Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults3.7%3.3–4.1
Depression among adults25.9%23.4–28.4
Diagnosed diabetes among adults6.8%6.2–7.5
High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened25.9%24.0–27.8
Obesity among adults30.7%27.8–33.7
Stroke among adults2.0%1.8–2.1
All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years5.8%4.9–6.9
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
MeasureCrude prevalence95% CI
Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years6.6%5.6–7.7
Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure67.8%65.6–69.8
Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults74.0%71.2–76.5
Cholesterol screening among adults81.5%79.4–83.5
Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years74.0%71.2–76.7
Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults70.5%68.2–72.7
Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years83.9%80.2–87.0
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
MeasureCrude prevalence95% CI
Binge drinking among adults22.7%20.1–25.3
Current cigarette smoking among adults8.9%7.8–10.2
No leisure-time physical activity among adults17.4%15.6–19.3
Short sleep duration among adults31.2%28.5–34.0
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
MeasureCrude prevalence95% CI
Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults13.4%12.0–14.8
Frequent mental distress among adults16.7%15.0–18.5
Frequent physical distress among adults9.2%8.2–10.1
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
MeasureCrude prevalence95% CI
Cognitive disability among adults12.5%11.1–14.0
Any disability among adults23.0%20.9–25.3
Hearing disability among adults4.2%3.7–4.6
Independent living disability among adults6.9%6.2–7.7
Mobility disability among adults7.6%6.8–8.4
Self-care disability among adults2.3%2.1–2.5
Vision disability among adults3.3%3.0–3.6
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
MeasureCrude prevalence95% CI
Lack of social and emotional support among adults20.3%18.2–22.5
Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults10.4%9.0–11.9
Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults10.2%8.9–11.8
Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults8.4%7.3–9.6
Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults6.9%6.1–7.8
Loneliness among adults34.5%31.7–37.3
Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults4.9%4.2–5.5
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
MeasureValueUS median (p10–p90)WI median (p10–p90)
Poverty rate15.9%10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,3648.5% (3.6–16.0%) n=765
Uninsured 18–646.9%9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,2866.7% (2.4–14.9%) n=764
No HS diploma (25+)3.1%7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,5055.9% (2.3–12.6%) n=768
Bachelor's or higher (25+)67.9%23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,50523.5% (12.7–44.0%) n=768
Unemployment rate (16+)4.5%3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,2742.6% (0.9–5.6%) n=763
Households without a vehicle20.7%3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,3223.6% (0.8–9.0%) n=764
Broadband subscription91.6%89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,32288.8% (80.0–94.8%) n=764
Housing cost burden (≥30% income)38.7%23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,32221.8% (14.7–29.1%) n=764
Homeownership rate21.4%78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,32281.3% (62.1–91.8%) n=764
Crowded housing (>1 per room)1.7%1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,3221.1% (0.0–3.7%) n=764
Foreign-born population9.8%2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,5531.9% (0.3–6.8%) n=768
Single-parent households73.5%53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,08759.0% (47.7–72.8%) n=762
Population 65+14.3%19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,55320.4% (13.9–32.2%) n=768
Median age32.5 yr42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,29244.2 yr (36.2–56.1) n=765
Median household income$71,034$72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318$75,147 ($57,542–$101,625) n=755
Median home value$340,800$222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049$231,900 ($160,140–$367,300) n=755
Median gross rent$1,259$1,021 ($677–$1,912) n=25,670$914 ($696–$1,261) n=706
Life expectancyNCHS / RWJF USALEEP · model-based
MeasureValueUS median (p10–p90)WI median (p10–p90)
Life expectancy unavailable for this ZIP — fewer than 80% of the census tracts that make it up could be matched across the 2010→2020 tract-boundary revision, so no value is published rather than an unreliable one. See how coverage gaps are handled.
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