ZIP code
75067
in Lewisville, TexasPopulation 66,913
54.11/ 100
Ranked #10,551 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 33%)
Ranked #318 of 1,868 Texas ZIPs (top 17%)
Ranked #95 of 265 Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington, TX ZIPs (top 36%)
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.
Natural-disaster risk
in the top 0.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & 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 ›Expected annual disaster loss
$1
in the top 0.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & 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 ›Dry extreme heat
91.2 days/year
in the top 2.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST78thUS97thDefinition & source ›
The average number of days per year with a modeled daily high of at least 95 °F.
Full methodology ›Subsidized affordable housing
501 units
in the top 4.5% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST92ndUS96thDefinition & source ›
The number of affordable rental units in this ZIP supported by the federal Low-Income Housing Tax Credit program.
Full methodology ›Coronary heart disease
4.0%
in the bottom 3.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST7thUS3rdDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have coronary heart disease or angina.
Full methodology ›Homeownership rate
39.8%
in the bottom 5.2% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST7thUS5thDefinition & source ›
The share of occupied homes that are owned, rather than rented, by the people living in them.
Full methodology ›Hearing disability
4.7%
in the bottom 4.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST8thUS4thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who are deaf or have serious difficulty hearing.
Full methodology ›Colon-cancer screening
56.5%
in the bottom 6.6% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST23rdUS7thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults aged 45–75 who are up to date on colorectal-cancer screening.
Full methodology ›Walkability
120 intersections/sq mi
in the top 7.6% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST93rdUS92ndDefinition & source ›
The number of street intersections per square mile — a standard street-connectivity measure; denser networks correlate with more walkable neighborhoods.
Full methodology ›Stroke
2.4%
in the bottom 5.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST9thUS5thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have had a stroke.
Full methodology ›The read
ZIP 75067, one of several in Lewisville, Texas, in overall standing, comes out in the top 33% healthiest ZIPs nationally (10,551st) and the top 17% of Texas (318th).
An even profile, with readings pulling both ways: subsidized affordable housing is in the top 4.5% nationally, modeled coronary heart disease lies in the bottom 3.3% nationally, and modeled hearing disability registers in the bottom 4.5% nationally. Walkability is in the top 7.6% nationally, and modeled stroke lies in the bottom 5.4% nationally. Against that, modeled disaster risk registers in the top 0.8% nationally, and expected annual loss is in the top 0.8% nationally. Modeled extreme heat lies in the top 2.6% nationally, and homeownership registers in the bottom 5.2% nationally. Modeled colon screening is in the bottom 6.6% nationally.
Set within its surrounding area, expected annual loss runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. Defined simply, for reference, disaster risk is the area's national rank on its highest non-flood peril in FEMA's modeled Risk Index, like wildfire or quake. Expected annual loss is FEMA's modeled estimate, in dollars, of average yearly harm to people from natural hazards. Extreme heat is a modeled count of days a year reaching a dangerously high temperature, a leading weather hazard. The closest healthier ZIP overall is ZIP 75007, 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 Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington, TX 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 92%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 65%
16%
Disability
healthier than 78%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 92%
5%
About typical
Risk Behavior
healthier than 48%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 55%
8%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 33%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 9%
13%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 12%
5%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 87%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 64%
16%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 67%
11%
Disability
healthier than 81%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 62%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 92%
5%
About typical
Mental Health
healthier than 58%
8%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 20%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 35%
13%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 79%
21%
Mental Health
healthier than 62%
8%
Disability
healthier than 64%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 92%
5%
About typical
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 48%
16%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 60%
11%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 60%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 27%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 32%
13%
“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 33.8; chronic-disease standing 92.1 (top 10%) — 58 points apart, heavier on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #15,245 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
75007
Texasshares a border
Score 58.85
Closest healthier
75019
Texasshares a border
Score 66.97
Similar health profile
76018
Texas99% similar profile
Score 53.00
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 | 18.9% | 16.7–21.4 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 28.5% | 25.4–32.0 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 4.9% | 4.4–5.4 |
| Current asthma among adults | 9.8% | 8.7–11.0 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 4.0% | 3.6–4.4 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 4.5% | 4.0–5.0 |
| Depression among adults | 21.1% | 18.3–24.3 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 10.2% | 9.0–11.6 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 33.7% | 30.2–37.5 |
| Obesity among adults | 36.1% | 30.6–41.9 |
| Stroke among adults | 2.4% | 2.2–2.6 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 10.4% | 8.6–12.7 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 16.6% | 14.8–18.5 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 69.1% | 65.9–72.4 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 72.1% | 68.6–75.8 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 83.6% | 81.8–85.4 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 56.5% | 52.3–61.1 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 58.6% | 55.6–61.9 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 76.5% | 70.3–82.4 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 17.7% | 15.0–20.9 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 11.5% | 9.9–13.2 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 25.2% | 21.7–29.0 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 38.2% | 33.9–43.0 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 19.1% | 16.9–21.4 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 17.7% | 15.8–19.7 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 11.6% | 10.4–13.1 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 14.6% | 13.1–16.3 |
| Any disability among adults | 27.9% | 24.5–31.5 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 4.7% | 4.2–5.3 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 7.4% | 6.6–8.2 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 11.3% | 10.0–12.8 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 3.2% | 3.0–3.5 |
| Vision disability among adults | 4.9% | 4.5–5.3 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | TX median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 6.6% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 12.4% (3.5–26.4%) n=1,869 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 20.2% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 22.3% (8.2–41.5%) n=1,862 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 12.3% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 12.2% (2.5–30.0%) n=1,881 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 33.7% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 21.9% (9.0–51.4%) n=1,881 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 4.1% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.2% (0.0–9.4%) n=1,865 |
| Households without a vehicle | 5.8% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 3.7% (0.0–10.8%) n=1,868 |
| Broadband subscription | 95.6% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 89.2% (75.0–97.3%) n=1,868 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 38.9% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 26.2% (8.8–40.3%) n=1,868 |
| Homeownership rate | 39.8% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 75.0% (46.4–92.3%) n=1,868 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 5.9% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 3.1% (0.0–9.0%) n=1,868 |
| Foreign-born population | 24.0% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 8.1% (0.1–26.4%) n=1,886 |
| Single-parent households | 43.5% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 48.5% (34.3–70.6%) n=1,861 |
| Population 65+ | 10.0% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 16.1% (8.6–30.1%) n=1,886 |
| Median age | 35.2 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 38.3 yr (30.9–52.3) n=1,866 |
| Median household income | $78,752 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $69,983 ($46,006–$112,413) n=1,737 |
| Median home value | $343,900 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $210,500 ($97,060–$429,760) n=1,693 |
| Median gross rent | $1,573 | $1,021 ($677–$1,912) n=25,670 | $1,154 ($764–$1,815) n=1,508 |
Life expectancyNCHS / RWJF USALEEP · model-based
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | TX 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