ZIP code
76155
in Fort Worth, TexasPopulation 6,533
52.17/ 100
Ranked #13,223 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 41%)
Ranked #414 of 1,868 Texas ZIPs (top 22%)
Ranked #121 of 265 Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington, TX ZIPs (top 46%)
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.
Transportation noise
97.8%
in the top 0.05% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The modeled share of residents exposed to average road, rail, and aviation noise at or above 55 decibels — a noticeable background presence.
Full methodology ›High cholesterol
25.4%
in the bottom 1.4% 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 ›Air-toxics cancer risk
54.5 per million
in the top 0.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The EPA’s modeled estimate of added lifetime cancer risk from breathing outdoor air toxics, in cases per million people exposed over a lifetime.
Full methodology ›Homeownership rate
0.41%
in the bottom 0.9% 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 ›Coronary heart disease
2.7%
in the bottom 1.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST2ndUS1stDefinition & 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 1.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST96thUS99thDefinition & 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 ›Hearing disability
3.1%
in the bottom 1.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS1stDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who are deaf or have serious difficulty hearing.
Full methodology ›Dry extreme heat
92.3 days/year
in the top 2.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST83rdUS98thDefinition & source ›
The average number of days per year with a modeled daily high of at least 95 °F.
Full methodology ›Stroke
1.9%
in the bottom 2.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST3rdUS2ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have had a stroke.
Full methodology ›High blood pressure
25.3%
in the bottom 3.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST3rdUS3rdDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have high blood pressure.
Full methodology ›The read
By its overall health score, ZIP 76155, one of several in Fort Worth, Texas lands in the top 41% healthiest ZIPs nationally (13,223rd) and the top 22% of Texas (414th).
Neither strongly one way nor the other, the measures sit mixed: modeled high cholesterol lands in the bottom 1.4% nationally, and coronary heart disease registers in the bottom 1.3% nationally. Modeled hearing disability sits in the bottom 1.0% nationally, and stroke rests in the bottom 2.0% nationally. Modeled high blood pressure is in the bottom 3.0% nationally. Against that, modeled transportation noise stands in the top 0.05% nationally, modeled air-toxics cancer risk settles in the top 0.5% nationally, and homeownership lies in the bottom 0.9% nationally. Modeled industrial-pollution burden resides in the top 1.1% nationally, and extreme heat lands in the top 2.3% nationally.
Weighed against the ZIPs nearby, transportation noise runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. To translate a couple of terms, air-toxics cancer risk is a modeled EPA estimate of added lifetime cancer risk from breathing outdoor air, per million people. Industrial-pollution burden is the EPA's modeled screening score weighting industrial chemical releases by their toxicity and how many people live nearby. Transportation noise is the modeled share of an area exposed to average road, rail, and air noise at or above 55 decibels. Overall, the nearest healthier neighbor is ZIP 76039, 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 98%
21%
Disability
healthier than 89%
7%
About typical
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 56%
16%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 41%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
in the bottom 0.6%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 8%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 27%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 37%
8%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 11%
5%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 97%
21%
Disability
healthier than 88%
7%
About typical
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 54%
16%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 41%
11%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 60%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
in the bottom 0.7%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 30%
13%
Mental Health
healthier than 30%
8%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 39%
5%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 96%
21%
Disability
healthier than 78%
7%
About typical
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 58%
5%
Holding it back
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 37%
16%
Environmental Hazard
in the bottom 0.00%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 27%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 38%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 31%
8%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 24%
5%
“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 0.6 (bottom 1%); chronic-disease standing 97.7 (top 10%) — 97 points apart, heavier on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #18,164 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
75050
Texasshares a border
Score 43.08
Closest healthier
76039
Texasshares a border
Score 57.00
Similar health profile
95323
California96% similar profile
Score 50.76
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 | 14.0% | 12.3–15.7 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 25.3% | 22.6–28.1 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 3.1% | 2.8–3.4 |
| Current asthma among adults | 10.3% | 9.1–11.6 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 2.7% | 2.4–3.1 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 3.3% | 2.9–3.9 |
| Depression among adults | 22.5% | 19.8–25.4 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 8.2% | 7.1–9.3 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 25.4% | 22.6–28.2 |
| Obesity among adults | 33.5% | 29.2–38.0 |
| Stroke among adults | 1.9% | 1.7–2.1 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 10.8% | 8.8–13.0 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 13.7% | 11.2–16.4 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 62.0% | 58.3–65.6 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 69.9% | 66.3–73.3 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 82.9% | 80.4–85.1 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 56.7% | 52.9–60.7 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 56.4% | 53.4–59.4 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 80.2% | 75.1–84.8 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 18.4% | 15.7–21.3 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 11.3% | 9.4–13.6 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 23.3% | 19.9–27.1 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 43.9% | 40.1–48.0 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 17.0% | 14.7–19.8 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 18.7% | 16.5–21.1 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 10.1% | 8.8–11.6 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 14.5% | 12.5–16.7 |
| Any disability among adults | 25.0% | 21.7–28.7 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 3.1% | 2.7–3.5 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 7.0% | 6.0–8.1 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 8.7% | 7.5–10.1 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 2.8% | 2.5–3.2 |
| Vision disability among adults | 4.3% | 3.8–4.9 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | TX median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 10.5% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 12.4% (3.5–26.4%) n=1,869 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 11.1% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 22.3% (8.2–41.5%) n=1,862 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 4.9% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 12.2% (2.5–30.0%) n=1,881 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 44.7% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 21.9% (9.0–51.4%) n=1,881 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 1.6% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.2% (0.0–9.4%) n=1,865 |
| Households without a vehicle | 2.8% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 3.7% (0.0–10.8%) n=1,868 |
| Broadband subscription | 98.2% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 89.2% (75.0–97.3%) n=1,868 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 43.6% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 26.2% (8.8–40.3%) n=1,868 |
| Homeownership rate | 0.4% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 75.0% (46.4–92.3%) n=1,868 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 3.6% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 3.1% (0.0–9.0%) n=1,868 |
| Foreign-born population | 26.8% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 8.1% (0.1–26.4%) n=1,886 |
| Single-parent households | 44.0% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 48.5% (34.3–70.6%) n=1,861 |
| Population 65+ | 2.1% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 16.1% (8.6–30.1%) n=1,886 |
| Median age | 31.5 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 38.3 yr (30.9–52.3) n=1,866 |
| Median household income | $73,229 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $69,983 ($46,006–$112,413) n=1,737 |
| Median home value | — | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $210,500 ($97,060–$429,760) n=1,693 |
| Median gross rent | $1,494 | $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