ZIP code
63103
in St. Louis, MissouriPopulation 8,778
46.54/ 100
Ranked #20,721 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 35%)
Ranked #356 of 993 Missouri ZIPs (top 36%)
Ranked #167 of 234 St. Louis, MO-IL ZIPs (bottom 29%)
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.
Transit access
11 per 1,000 residents
in the top 1.0% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The number of public-transit stops 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 ›Civic-institution access
1.7 per 1,000 residents
in the top 1.6% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS98thDefinition & 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 ›High cholesterol
28.2%
in the bottom 2.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS2ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with high cholesterol, among those who have ever been screened for it.
Full methodology ›Subsidized affordable housing
919 units
in the top 1.7% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS98thDefinition & source ›
The number of affordable rental units in this ZIP supported by the federal Low-Income Housing Tax Credit program.
Full methodology ›Walkability
230 intersections/sq mi
in the top 1.7% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST98thUS98thDefinition & source ›
The number of street intersections per square mile — a standard street-connectivity measure; denser networks correlate with more walkable neighborhoods.
Full methodology ›Homeownership rate
17.5%
in the bottom 1.8% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST1stUS2ndDefinition & source ›
The share of occupied homes that are owned, rather than rented, by the people living in them.
Full methodology ›Tooth loss
28%
in the top 4.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST95thUS96thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults aged 65 and older who have lost all of their natural teeth.
Full methodology ›Elder-services access
0.53 per 1,000 residents
in the top 2.2% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST98thUS98thDefinition & source ›
The number of services for older adults and people with disabilities 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 ›Households without a vehicle
25.6%
in the top 3.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST98thUS97thDefinition & source ›
The share of households with no vehicle available.
Full methodology ›Floodplain exposure
0.00%
at the national minimum
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS1stDefinition & source ›
The share of this ZIP’s land area inside FEMA’s 1%-annual-chance floodplain — the “100-year” flood zone, where flooding has about a 1-in-100 chance in any given year.
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 ›The read
Overall, ZIP 63103, one of several in St. Louis, Missouri lands in the bottom 35% nationally (20,721st) and the top 36% of Missouri (356th).
A number of measures mark where this area is under strain: homeownership settles in the bottom 1.8% nationally, and modeled tooth loss resides in the top 4.4% nationally. Households without a vehicle registers in the top 3.1% nationally. On the brighter side, transit rests in the top 1.0% nationally, civic stands in the top 1.6% nationally, and modeled high cholesterol lies in the bottom 2.1% nationally. Subsidized affordable housing lands in the top 1.7% nationally, walkability sits in the top 1.7% nationally, and elder services is in the top 2.2% nationally. Floodplain exposure settles at the national minimum.
Set beside the nearby areas, park land runs far lower than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. A note on the terms: subsidized affordable housing is the main federal tax-credit program (HUD) funding affordable rental housing, counted as local units it supports. Floodplain exposure is land with about a 1-in-100 chance of flooding each year, nicknamed the "100-year floodplain". For a healthier nearby comparison, ZIP 63101, just across the boundary, ranks better 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 St. Louis, MO-IL 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 74%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 83%
16%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 94%
5%
About typical
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 55%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 2%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 18%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 20%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 12%
8%
Disability
healthier than 26%
7%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 90%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 88%
16%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 98%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 94%
5%
About typical
Risk Behavior
healthier than 47%
11%
Disability
healthier than 50%
7%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 3%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 14%
13%
Mental Health
healthier than 10%
8%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 75%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 68%
16%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 92%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 94%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 1%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 3%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 25%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 3%
8%
Disability
healthier than 18%
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 2.3 (bottom 10%); chronic-disease standing 74.4 — 72 points apart, heavier on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #16,579 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
63101
Missourishares a border
Score 57.73
Closest healthier
63102
Missourishares a border
Score 53.80
Similar health profile
65807
Missouri95% similar profile
Score 48.29
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 | 19.5% | 17.7–21.4 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 32.1% | 29.6–34.8 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 4.1% | 3.7–4.5 |
| Current asthma among adults | 12.1% | 10.7–13.4 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 5.0% | 4.5–5.5 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 6.7% | 5.9–7.4 |
| Depression among adults | 25.2% | 22.3–28.1 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 11.6% | 10.3–12.9 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 28.2% | 25.5–30.8 |
| Obesity among adults | 36.2% | 32.2–40.4 |
| Stroke among adults | 3.5% | 3.2–3.8 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 28.0% | 24.3–31.6 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 9.7% | 8.1–11.6 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 68.2% | 65.9–70.4 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 78.0% | 74.9–80.7 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 77.6% | 74.9–80.0 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 63.3% | 59.1–67.2 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 52.1% | 49.0–55.2 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 80.6% | 75.2–85.0 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 18.7% | 16.1–21.4 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 15.7% | 13.5–18.0 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 26.7% | 23.4–30.3 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 39.0% | 35.1–42.9 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 22.9% | 20.3–25.7 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 21.0% | 18.7–23.2 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 12.9% | 11.5–14.5 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 21.6% | 19.2–24.3 |
| Any disability among adults | 36.8% | 33.1–40.4 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 5.5% | 4.9–6.1 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 12.0% | 10.5–13.5 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 14.3% | 12.7–15.8 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 4.9% | 4.4–5.4 |
| Vision disability among adults | 7.1% | 6.4–7.9 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 26.1% | 22.8–29.3 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 24.9% | 21.6–28.1 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 22.4% | 19.4–25.6 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 20.8% | 18.1–23.5 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 15.6% | 13.6–17.6 |
| Loneliness among adults | 39.3% | 35.2–43.2 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 17.0% | 14.9–19.1 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | MO median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 23.1% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 12.3% (3.2–26.0%) n=1,009 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 9.9% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 13.2% (3.5–28.4%) n=1,006 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 8.2% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 9.5% (2.5–20.5%) n=1,009 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 50.2% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 18.1% (7.2–40.2%) n=1,009 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 4.5% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 2.9% (0.0–8.5%) n=1,003 |
| Households without a vehicle | 25.6% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 4.1% (0.0–11.9%) n=1,009 |
| Broadband subscription | 83.1% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 86.3% (72.7–95.2%) n=1,009 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 41.9% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 20.7% (8.4–33.9%) n=1,009 |
| Homeownership rate | 17.5% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 79.4% (56.0–94.3%) n=1,009 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 1.3% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 1.1% (0.0–5.1%) n=1,009 |
| Foreign-born population | 7.0% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 0.8% (0.0–6.4%) n=1,010 |
| Single-parent households | 62.6% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 55.0% (39.5–75.6%) n=1,005 |
| Population 65+ | 16.4% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 19.2% (11.7–31.1%) n=1,010 |
| Median age | 33.0 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 41.5 yr (33.3–55.9) n=1,005 |
| Median household income | $40,943 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $61,740 ($42,457–$95,231) n=948 |
| Median home value | $202,900 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $174,150 ($91,880–$309,500) n=930 |
| Median gross rent | $996 | $1,021 ($677–$1,912) n=25,670 | $813 ($553–$1,265) n=786 |
Life expectancyNCHS / RWJF USALEEP · model-based
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | MO 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