ZIP code
88004
in Las Cruces, New MexicoPopulation 1,080
63.47/ 100
Ranked #2,723 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 8.5%)
Ranked #12 of 337 New Mexico ZIPs (top 3.6%)
Ranked #2 of 23 Las Cruces, NM ZIPs (top 8.7%)
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.
Binge drinking
27.7%
in the top 0.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who report binge drinking — five or more drinks on one occasion for men, four or more for women.
Full methodology ›High cholesterol
21.9%
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 ›Colon-cancer screening
47.1%
in the bottom 1.2% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST8thUS1stDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults aged 45–75 who are up to date on colorectal-cancer screening.
Full methodology ›High blood pressure
19.9%
in the bottom 1.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS1stDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have high blood pressure.
Full methodology ›Diabetes
4.2%
in the bottom 1.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS1stDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been diagnosed with diabetes.
Full methodology ›Coronary heart disease
2.4%
in the bottom 1.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS1stDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have coronary heart disease or angina.
Full methodology ›Stroke
1.2%
in the bottom 1.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS1stDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have had a stroke.
Full methodology ›Mobility disability
4.5%
in the bottom 0.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS1stDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with serious difficulty walking or climbing stairs.
Full methodology ›Expected annual disaster loss
$0
in the bottom 1.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS1stDefinition & 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 ›Fatal road crashes
0 per 100,000 residents per year
at the national minimum
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS1stDefinition & source ›
The annual rate of fatal road crashes per 100,000 residents, pooled over a ten-year window.
A rate per resident population. Where a ZIP has too few residents for the rate to be reliable — about 30% of US ZIPs — no value is published rather than an unstable one; those ZIPs are absent from this comparison, not counted as crash-free.
Full methodology ›The read
By its overall health score, ZIP 88004, one of several in Las Cruces, New Mexico lands in the top 8.5% healthiest ZIPs nationally (2,723rd) and the top 3.6% of New Mexico (12th).
The measures split the difference for this area: modeled high cholesterol lands in the bottom 1.0% nationally, and high blood pressure registers in the bottom 1.3% nationally. Modeled diabetes sits in the bottom 1.0% nationally, and coronary heart disease rests in the bottom 1.2% nationally. Modeled stroke is in the bottom 1.0% nationally, mobility disability stands in the bottom 0.8% nationally, and expected annual loss settles in the bottom 1.0% nationally. Fatal road crashes lies at the national minimum. Against that, modeled binge drinking resides in the top 0.2% nationally, and colon screening lands in the bottom 1.2% nationally.
To translate a couple of terms, expected annual loss is FEMA's modeled estimate, in dollars, of average yearly harm to people from natural hazards. Overall, the nearest healthier neighbor is ZIP 88011, about 12 miles away.
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 Las Cruces, NM 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
in the top 0.5%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 77%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 91%
14%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 67%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 61%
8%
Disability
healthier than 98%
7%
About typical
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 48%
5%
Holding it back
Preventive Care
healthier than 3%
13%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 14%
5%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
in the top 0.00%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 91%
16%
Disability
in the top 0.00%
7%
About typical
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 53%
14%
Mental Health
healthier than 49%
8%
Holding it back
Preventive Care
healthier than 23%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 40%
11%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 21%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 28%
5%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
in the top 0.00%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 95%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 81%
14%
Disability
in the top 0.00%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 90%
5%
About typical
Preventive Care
healthier than 48%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 57%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 57%
8%
Holding it back
Healthcare Access
healthier than 5%
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 ›
Nearby & similar ZIPs
Editorially selected — see how this ZIP compares to nearby and similar places.
Nearby
88005
New Mexicoshares a border
Score 47.25
Closest healthier
88011
New Mexicoabout 12 mi away
Score 63.82
Similar health profile
39534
Mississippi98% similar profile
Score 65.01
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 | 11.0% | 9.2–13.2 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 19.9% | 16.8–23.6 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 3.3% | 2.9–3.8 |
| Current asthma among adults | 8.0% | 6.9–9.4 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 2.4% | 1.9–3.0 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 2.8% | 1.9–4.0 |
| Depression among adults | 22.8% | 19.2–27.1 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 4.2% | 3.3–5.3 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 21.9% | 18.8–25.3 |
| Obesity among adults | 29.5% | 24.2–35.4 |
| Stroke among adults | 1.2% | 1.0–1.6 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 2.1% | 1.6–2.7 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 7.3% | 4.4–12.0 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 47.2% | 42.1–52.3 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 59.4% | 54.5–64.4 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 76.6% | 71.3–81.3 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 47.1% | 42.6–51.4 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 70.0% | 66.7–73.2 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 68.9% | 61.0–75.7 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 27.7% | 23.4–32.4 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 12.3% | 7.2–18.5 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 11.9% | 8.2–16.6 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 30.6% | 26.3–35.3 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 12.0% | 8.4–16.9 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 15.8% | 12.6–19.4 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 8.7% | 6.6–11.2 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 13.0% | 9.3–17.4 |
| Any disability among adults | 21.3% | 16.0–27.7 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 3.8% | 3.1–4.7 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 5.1% | 3.6–7.0 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 4.5% | 3.1–6.2 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 1.8% | 1.3–2.5 |
| Vision disability among adults | 2.5% | 1.8–3.3 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 23.7% | 18.8–29.8 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 9.3% | 5.6–14.8 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 7.5% | 4.1–12.5 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 8.9% | 5.9–13.0 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 6.4% | 4.5–9.0 |
| Loneliness among adults | 32.8% | 27.7–38.9 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 6.5% | 4.6–8.9 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | NM median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | — | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 15.0% (0.0–39.0%) n=347 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | — | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 12.5% (0.0–35.5%) n=339 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 38.3% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 9.2% (0.0–28.5%) n=350 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 7.0% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 19.3% (0.0–51.7%) n=350 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | — | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 3.8% (0.0–15.2%) n=339 |
| Households without a vehicle | — | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 2.3% (0.0–12.4%) n=347 |
| Broadband subscription | — | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 83.1% (53.2–100.0%) n=347 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | — | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 18.6% (0.0–41.4%) n=347 |
| Homeownership rate | — | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 83.2% (59.9–100.0%) n=347 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | — | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 0.4% (0.0–11.2%) n=347 |
| Foreign-born population | 19.4% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 1.9% (0.0–15.7%) n=352 |
| Single-parent households | — | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 55.0% (28.8–100.0%) n=339 |
| Population 65+ | 2.3% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 22.8% (7.9–55.9%) n=352 |
| Median age | 40.5 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 45.0 yr (31.2–67.3) n=339 |
| Median household income | — | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $55,329 ($33,023–$90,174) n=265 |
| Median home value | — | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $185,100 ($77,100–$382,920) n=255 |
| Median gross rent | — | $1,021 ($677–$1,912) n=25,670 | $917 ($549–$1,408) n=173 |
Life expectancyNCHS / RWJF USALEEP · model-based
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | NM median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Life expectancy at birth | 81.7 yr ± 1.59 | 78.9 yr (74.7–82.8) n=31,308 | 79.5 yr (76.1–83.2) n=357 |
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 1.59 years of 81.7, 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