ZIP code
84044
in Magna, UtahPopulation 30,031
47.73/ 100
Ranked #19,271 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 40%)
Ranked #251 of 284 Utah ZIPs (bottom 11.7%)
Ranked #37 of 43 Salt Lake City-Murray, UT ZIPs (bottom 14.0%)
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.
Industrial-pollution burden
in the top 1.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & 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 ›Distance to a Superfund site
In this ZIP
at the national minimum
Higher is healthier
ST1stUS1stDefinition & source ›
The distance in miles from this ZIP’s edge to the nearest Superfund site — an abandoned or uncontrolled hazardous-waste site the EPA has listed for cleanup.
Full methodology ›High cholesterol
29.3%
in the bottom 2.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST12thUS3rdDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with high cholesterol, among those who have ever been screened for it.
Full methodology ›Fine-particle (PM2.5) exceedance
1.9%
in the top 5.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST85thUS95thDefinition & source ›
The share of days in the year when modeled fine-particle (PM2.5) pollution was above the EPA’s daily limit of 35 micrograms per cubic meter.
Full methodology ›Lithium in drinking water
75 µg/L
in the top 5.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS95thDefinition & source ›
The average detected level of lithium — a natural trace metal with no federal drinking-water limit yet — across the public water systems serving this ZIP, in micrograms per liter.
Measured from EPA records for the public water systems that serve this ZIP. Households on private wells — roughly 30% of the US population — are not covered by this measure, and this figure says nothing about their water.
Full methodology ›High blood pressure
26.6%
in the bottom 4.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST16thUS4thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have high blood pressure.
Full methodology ›Floodplain exposure
42.8%
in the top 5.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST97thUS94thDefinition & 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 ›Coronary heart disease
4.2%
in the bottom 4.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST11thUS4thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have coronary heart disease or angina.
Full methodology ›Loneliness
38.9%
in the top 6.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST96thUS94thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who report feeling lonely.
Full methodology ›Expected annual disaster loss
$0
in the top 7.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST82ndUS93rdDefinition & 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 ›The read
On balance, and by the composite measure, Magna, Utah (ZIP 84044) ranks in the bottom 40% nationally (19,271st) and the bottom 11.7% of Utah (251st).
The burdens that read clearest in the data come first: modeled industrial-pollution burden sits in the top 1.5% nationally, and distance to a Superfund site rests at the national minimum. Modeled fine-particle is in the top 5.0% nationally, and lithium in drinking water stands in the top 5.1% nationally. Floodplain exposure settles in the top 5.6% nationally, modeled loneliness lies in the top 6.3% nationally, and modeled expected annual loss resides in the top 7.2% nationally. Better still, modeled high cholesterol lands in the bottom 2.8% nationally, high blood pressure registers in the bottom 4.2% nationally, and coronary heart disease sits in the bottom 4.1% nationally.
Compared with the ZIPs it borders, industrial-pollution burden runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. In plainer terms, industrial-pollution burden is the EPA's modeled screening score weighting industrial chemical releases by their toxicity and how many people live nearby. Distance to a Superfund site is an abandoned or uncontrolled hazardous-waste site the EPA has identified for cleanup. Fine-particle is fine airborne particles about one-thirtieth the width of a hair, counted on modeled days above the EPA standard. For a healthier nearby ZIP overall, look to ZIP 84006, 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 Salt Lake City-Murray, UT 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 91%
21%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 72%
11%
Disability
healthier than 63%
7%
About typical
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 59%
16%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 56%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 6%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 3%
13%
Mental Health
healthier than 7%
8%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 18%
5%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 66%
21%
About typical
Disability
healthier than 42%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 59%
5%
Holding it back
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 18%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 13%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 8%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 5%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 7%
8%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 2%
5%
Nothing measured is lifting this score.
About typical
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 51%
21%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 41%
14%
Holding it back
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 20%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 15%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 10%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 12%
8%
Disability
healthier than 17%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 2%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 20%
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
2 of our published findings list 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.
Below what income predicts
The ZIP codes that outlive their incomes
Estimated life expectancy is 77.4 ± 1.6 years. A median household income of $90,346 predicts 79.7 years — 2.2 years below.
Ranked #3,060 of the 5,842 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by years above what income predicts, highest first.
Heavy environment, light chronic burden
Where the environment and chronic illness point in opposite directions
Environmental-hazard standing 6.1 (bottom 10%); chronic-disease standing 91.2 (top 10%) — 85 points apart, heavier on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #17,572 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
84006
Utahshares a border
Score 59.24
Closest healthier
84074
Utahshares a border
Score 55.25
Similar health profile
95843
California96% similar profile
Score 51.08
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 | 19.9% | 18.2–21.5 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 26.6% | 24.5–28.6 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 5.6% | 5.1–6.1 |
| Current asthma among adults | 11.4% | 10.3–12.5 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 4.2% | 3.8–4.6 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 4.8% | 4.3–5.4 |
| Depression among adults | 28.9% | 26.4–31.3 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 8.8% | 7.9–9.8 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 29.3% | 27.1–31.5 |
| Obesity among adults | 32.7% | 29.3–36.0 |
| Stroke among adults | 2.5% | 2.3–2.7 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 13.9% | 11.6–16.4 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 17.2% | 15.2–19.2 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 61.9% | 59.0–64.6 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 66.2% | 63.4–68.9 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 77.8% | 75.8–79.8 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 58.8% | 55.5–62.1 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 63.2% | 60.5–66.0 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 71.1% | 65.9–76.1 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 15.9% | 14.0–17.8 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 10.4% | 9.1–11.8 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 22.6% | 20.1–25.2 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 37.2% | 34.0–40.6 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 19.7% | 17.8–21.7 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 19.9% | 18.2–21.7 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 14.1% | 12.8–15.5 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 18.2% | 16.4–19.9 |
| Any disability among adults | 31.6% | 28.9–34.2 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 5.9% | 5.3–6.5 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 7.9% | 7.1–8.7 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 11.6% | 10.4–12.8 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 3.2% | 2.9–3.5 |
| Vision disability among adults | 5.2% | 4.7–5.7 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 26.1% | 23.7–28.7 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 20.0% | 17.8–22.1 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 9.2% | 7.8–10.6 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 15.7% | 14.0–17.4 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 9.5% | 8.5–10.6 |
| Loneliness among adults | 38.9% | 36.2–41.9 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 9.2% | 8.1–10.4 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | UT median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 10.8% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 7.0% (1.0–21.5%) n=283 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 21.2% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 10.1% (2.9–25.0%) n=281 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 13.9% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 5.4% (0.0–15.0%) n=284 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 13.0% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 28.5% (10.8–53.1%) n=284 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 4.5% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 2.9% (0.0–8.7%) n=281 |
| Households without a vehicle | 5.3% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 2.0% (0.0–7.7%) n=283 |
| Broadband subscription | 95.8% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 93.3% (78.4–98.3%) n=283 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 29.5% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 21.1% (7.6–35.3%) n=283 |
| Homeownership rate | 78.9% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 81.5% (52.0–96.8%) n=283 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 4.4% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 2.0% (0.0–7.6%) n=283 |
| Foreign-born population | 18.6% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 3.2% (0.0–11.8%) n=284 |
| Single-parent households | 38.9% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 49.8% (37.3–72.7%) n=281 |
| Population 65+ | 8.7% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 15.3% (7.9–29.1%) n=284 |
| Median age | 33.4 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 35.9 yr (27.6–52.1) n=283 |
| Median household income | $90,346 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $82,344 ($52,938–$126,884) n=260 |
| Median home value | $376,200 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $402,500 ($229,220–$651,780) n=259 |
| Median gross rent | $1,625 | $1,021 ($677–$1,912) n=25,670 | $1,321 ($834–$1,911) n=198 |
Life expectancyNCHS / RWJF USALEEP · model-based
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | UT median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Life expectancy at birth | 77.4 yr ± 0.84 | 78.9 yr (74.7–82.8) n=31,308 | 80.7 yr (77.0–85.3) n=277 |
About the ± — it’s this estimate’s give-or-take (statisticians call it the standard error). The true life expectancy for this ZIP most likely falls within 0.84 years of 77.4, and it’s very unlikely to be off by more than twice that.
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