ZIP code
53233
in Milwaukee, WisconsinPopulation 14,497
35.49/ 100
Ranked #29,195 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 9.0%)
Ranked #757 of 763 Wisconsin ZIPs (bottom 0.8%)
Ranked #75 of 80 Milwaukee-Waukesha, WI ZIPs (bottom 6.3%)
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.
Independent-living disability
18.1%
in the top 0.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & 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 ›High cholesterol
21.8%
in the bottom 1.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS1stDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with high cholesterol, among those who have ever been screened for it.
Full methodology ›Cognitive disability
26.7%
in the top 0.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with serious difficulty concentrating, remembering, or making decisions.
Full methodology ›Tooth loss
33.8%
in the top 1.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults aged 65 and older who have lost all of their natural teeth.
Full methodology ›Loud transportation noise
7.3%
in the top 0.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The modeled share of residents exposed to average road, rail, and aviation noise at or above 65 decibels — around the volume of normal conversation.
Full methodology ›Loneliness
44.2%
in the top 0.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who report feeling lonely.
Full methodology ›Lack of transportation
23.4%
in the top 1.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who lacked reliable transportation in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Poverty rate
58.2%
in the top 1.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The share of residents whose income is below the federal poverty line, from the Census Bureau’s American Community Survey.
Full methodology ›Homeownership rate
2.9%
in the bottom 1.1% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST1stUS1stDefinition & source ›
The share of occupied homes that are owned, rather than rented, by the people living in them.
Full methodology ›Households without a vehicle
41%
in the top 1.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The share of households with no vehicle available.
Full methodology ›The read
By the composite measure, ZIP 53233, one of several in Milwaukee, Wisconsin sits in the bottom 9.0% nationally (29,195th) and the bottom 0.8% of Wisconsin (757th).
Where this area is stretched, the data is unambiguous: modeled independent living disability lies in the top 0.6% nationally, cognitive disability settles in the top 0.5% nationally, and tooth loss stands in the top 1.5% nationally. Modeled loud transportation noise is in the top 0.6% nationally, loneliness rests in the top 0.8% nationally, and transportation sits in the top 1.0% nationally. Poverty registers in the top 1.1% nationally, and homeownership lands in the bottom 1.1% nationally. Households without a vehicle resides in the top 1.5% nationally. Better still, modeled high cholesterol lies in the bottom 1.0% nationally.
Compared with the ZIPs that surround it, loud transportation noise runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. In plain language, loud transportation noise is the modeled share of an area exposed to road, rail, and air noise at or above 65 decibels, near conversation volume. ZIP 53203, 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 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 84%
21%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 73%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 86%
5%
Holding it back
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 4%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 3%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 3%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 6%
11%
Mental Health
in the bottom 0.9%
8%
Disability
healthier than 11%
7%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 93%
21%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 91%
5%
About typical
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 48%
5%
Holding it back
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 1%
16%
Environmental Hazard
in the bottom 0.8%
14%
Preventive Care
in the bottom 0.3%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 1%
11%
Mental Health
in the bottom 0.2%
8%
Disability
healthier than 1%
7%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 94%
21%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 86%
5%
About typical
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 51%
5%
Holding it back
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 13%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 6%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 1%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 10%
11%
Mental Health
in the bottom 0.00%
8%
Disability
healthier than 11%
7%
“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
One of our published findings lists 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.
Heavy environment, light chronic burden
Where the environment and chronic illness point in opposite directions
Environmental-hazard standing 2.7 (bottom 10%); chronic-disease standing 84.4 — 82 points apart, heavier on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #17,318 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
53203
Wisconsinshares a border
Score 55.87
Closest healthier
53208
Wisconsinshares a border
Score 42.04
Similar health profile
44304
Ohio98% similar profile
Score 32.55
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 | 13.3% | 12.3–14.5 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 25.6% | 23.8–27.4 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 2.0% | 1.9–2.2 |
| Current asthma among adults | 13.7% | 12.4–15.2 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 3.9% | 3.5–4.3 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 6.5% | 5.8–7.2 |
| Depression among adults | 31.0% | 28.3–33.8 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 9.0% | 8.2–9.8 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 21.8% | 20.2–23.5 |
| Obesity among adults | 39.0% | 35.7–42.3 |
| Stroke among adults | 2.6% | 2.4–2.8 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 33.8% | 29.7–37.7 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 14.7% | 12.5–17.2 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 56.0% | 53.7–58.2 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 71.5% | 68.4–74.4 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 63.9% | 60.6–67.2 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 56.9% | 53.4–60.4 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 46.1% | 43.4–48.8 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 78.1% | 73.6–82.0 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 18.6% | 16.3–21.0 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 18.0% | 16.0–20.4 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 33.5% | 30.4–36.9 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 39.8% | 36.8–42.9 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 29.4% | 26.8–32.4 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 27.2% | 24.8–29.7 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 14.6% | 13.2–16.2 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 26.7% | 24.1–29.7 |
| Any disability among adults | 40.9% | 37.6–44.3 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 4.5% | 4.0–5.0 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 18.1% | 16.2–20.2 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 12.3% | 11.2–13.5 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 5.6% | 5.1–6.1 |
| Vision disability among adults | 9.8% | 8.9–10.9 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 28.4% | 25.5–31.2 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 39.2% | 35.2–43.3 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 45.2% | 40.7–49.4 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 24.0% | 21.3–26.6 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 23.4% | 20.9–26.0 |
| Loneliness among adults | 44.2% | 40.9–47.3 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 16.6% | 14.7–18.6 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | WI median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 58.2% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 8.5% (3.6–16.0%) n=765 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 8.3% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 6.7% (2.4–14.9%) n=764 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 21.5% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 5.9% (2.3–12.6%) n=768 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 18.7% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 23.5% (12.7–44.0%) n=768 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 7.4% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 2.6% (0.9–5.6%) n=763 |
| Households without a vehicle | 41.0% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 3.6% (0.8–9.0%) n=764 |
| Broadband subscription | 87.9% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 88.8% (80.0–94.8%) n=764 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 54.0% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 21.8% (14.7–29.1%) n=764 |
| Homeownership rate | 2.9% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 81.3% (62.1–91.8%) n=764 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 3.7% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 1.1% (0.0–3.7%) n=764 |
| Foreign-born population | 7.9% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 1.9% (0.3–6.8%) n=768 |
| Single-parent households | 26.6% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 59.0% (47.7–72.8%) n=762 |
| Population 65+ | 3.5% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 20.4% (13.9–32.2%) n=768 |
| Median age | 22.3 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 44.2 yr (36.2–56.1) n=765 |
| Median household income | $23,750 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $75,147 ($57,542–$101,625) n=755 |
| Median home value | $137,500 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $231,900 ($160,140–$367,300) n=755 |
| Median gross rent | $853 | $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