ZIP code
53211
in Milwaukee, WisconsinPopulation 34,234
62.17/ 100
Ranked #3,413 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 10.7%)
Ranked #60 of 763 Wisconsin ZIPs (top 7.9%)
Ranked #31 of 80 Milwaukee-Waukesha, WI ZIPs (top 39%)
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
27.7%
in the bottom 1.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST2ndUS2ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with high cholesterol, among those who have ever been screened for it.
Full methodology ›Expected annual disaster loss
$1
in the top 1.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST98thUS98thDefinition & 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
84.3%
in the top 1.1% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST98thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of women aged 50–74 who had a mammogram within the past two years.
Full methodology ›High blood pressure
24.5%
in the bottom 2.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS2ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have high blood pressure.
Full methodology ›Natural-disaster risk
in the top 2.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST98thUS97thDefinition & 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 ›Binge drinking
21%
in the top 3.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST91stUS97thDefinition & 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 ›Coronary heart disease
4.0%
in the bottom 3.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS3rdDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have coronary heart disease or angina.
Full methodology ›Stroke
2.1%
in the bottom 2.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS3rdDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have had a stroke.
Full methodology ›Diabetes
7.3%
in the bottom 2.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS3rdDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been diagnosed with diabetes.
Full methodology ›Hearing disability
4.5%
in the bottom 3.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS4thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who are deaf or have serious difficulty hearing.
Full methodology ›The read
In its overall standing, ZIP 53211, one of several in Milwaukee, Wisconsin lands in the top 10.7% healthiest ZIPs nationally (3,413th) and the top 7.9% of Wisconsin (60th), based on limited data; treat as directional.
This area's measures are easy to read as a mixed set: modeled high cholesterol lies in the bottom 1.9% nationally, mammography stands in the top 1.1% nationally, and high blood pressure rests in the bottom 2.5% nationally. Modeled coronary heart disease registers in the bottom 3.3% nationally, stroke resides in the bottom 2.8% nationally, and diabetes settles in the bottom 2.8% nationally. Modeled hearing disability is in the bottom 3.6% nationally. Set against that, modeled expected annual loss sits in the top 1.6% nationally, and disaster risk lands in the top 2.8% nationally. Modeled binge drinking lies in the top 3.3% nationally.
Against the wider neighborhood, industrial-pollution burden runs far lower than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. Put simply, expected annual loss is FEMA's modeled estimate, in dollars, of average yearly harm to people from natural hazards. Disaster risk is the area's national rank on its highest non-flood peril in FEMA's modeled Risk Index, like wildfire or quake. On the overall standing, ZIP 53202, just across the boundary, ranks healthier.
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.
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 96%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 76%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 68%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 81%
11%
Disability
healthier than 90%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 85%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 12%
14%
Mental Health
healthier than 28%
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
healthier than 99%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 70%
16%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 95%
11%
Disability
healthier than 95%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 91%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 9%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 38%
13%
Mental Health
healthier than 5%
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
healthier than 98%
21%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 85%
11%
Disability
healthier than 85%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 83%
5%
About typical
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 45%
14%
Holding it back
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 31%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 22%
13%
Mental Health
healthier than 12%
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.
Nearby
53202
Wisconsinshares a border
Score 62.82
Closest healthier
53217
Wisconsinshares a border
Score 68.67
Similar health profile
02144
Massachusetts99% similar profile
Score 66.35
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 | 18.3% | 17.0–19.7 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 24.5% | 22.7–26.4 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 6.1% | 5.6–6.6 |
| Current asthma among adults | 11.3% | 10.1–12.5 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 4.0% | 3.7–4.4 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 4.1% | 3.6–4.5 |
| Depression among adults | 26.4% | 24.1–28.9 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 7.3% | 6.5–8.1 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 27.7% | 25.8–29.6 |
| Obesity among adults | 30.0% | 27.2–32.9 |
| Stroke among adults | 2.1% | 1.9–2.3 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 7.7% | 6.5–9.0 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 6.1% | 5.2–7.4 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 70.3% | 68.1–72.4 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 75.7% | 73.0–78.1 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 81.5% | 79.5–83.5 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 73.2% | 70.4–75.8 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 72.3% | 70.1–74.5 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 84.3% | 80.7–87.3 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 21.0% | 18.6–23.4 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 8.6% | 7.5–9.8 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 17.8% | 15.9–19.8 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 30.0% | 27.4–32.8 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 13.9% | 12.5–15.4 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 17.0% | 15.4–18.8 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 9.7% | 8.7–10.7 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 13.0% | 11.6–14.6 |
| Any disability among adults | 24.3% | 22.1–26.7 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 4.5% | 4.1–5.0 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 7.5% | 6.7–8.4 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 8.3% | 7.4–9.2 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 2.4% | 2.2–2.7 |
| Vision disability among adults | 3.5% | 3.2–3.9 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 19.6% | 17.5–21.7 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 10.6% | 9.1–12.1 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 10.4% | 8.9–11.9 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 8.0% | 6.9–9.1 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 7.2% | 6.3–8.2 |
| Loneliness among adults | 34.4% | 31.5–37.0 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 4.7% | 4.1–5.4 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | WI median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 17.8% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 8.5% (3.6–16.0%) n=765 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 6.3% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 6.7% (2.4–14.9%) n=764 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 2.0% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 5.9% (2.3–12.6%) n=768 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 71.7% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 23.5% (12.7–44.0%) n=768 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 3.9% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 2.6% (0.9–5.6%) n=763 |
| Households without a vehicle | 11.8% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 3.6% (0.8–9.0%) n=764 |
| Broadband subscription | 91.8% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 88.8% (80.0–94.8%) n=764 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 35.3% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 21.8% (14.7–29.1%) n=764 |
| Homeownership rate | 40.1% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 81.3% (62.1–91.8%) n=764 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 0.6% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 1.1% (0.0–3.7%) n=764 |
| Foreign-born population | 7.4% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 1.9% (0.3–6.8%) n=768 |
| Single-parent households | 53.4% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 59.0% (47.7–72.8%) n=762 |
| Population 65+ | 14.3% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 20.4% (13.9–32.2%) n=768 |
| Median age | 31.7 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 44.2 yr (36.2–56.1) n=765 |
| Median household income | $75,256 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $75,147 ($57,542–$101,625) n=755 |
| Median home value | $434,500 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $231,900 ($160,140–$367,300) n=755 |
| Median gross rent | $1,287 | $1,021 ($677–$1,912) n=25,670 | $914 ($696–$1,261) n=706 |
Life expectancyNCHS / RWJF USALEEP · model-based
| Measure | Value | US 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 ▾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