ZIP code
90005
in Los Angeles, CaliforniaPopulation 39,142
51.14/ 100
Ranked #14,606 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 46%)
Ranked #992 of 1,719 California ZIPs (bottom 42%)
Ranked #271 of 371 Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim, CA ZIPs (bottom 27%)
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.
Colon-cancer screening
47.4%
in the bottom 1.2% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST6thUS1stDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults aged 45–75 who are up to date on colorectal-cancer screening.
Full methodology ›Expected annual disaster loss
$1
in the top 0.2% 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 ›Subsidized affordable housing
1,621 units
in the top 0.5% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The number of affordable rental units in this ZIP supported by the federal Low-Income Housing Tax Credit program.
Full methodology ›Air-toxics cancer risk
50 per million
in the top 0.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST95thUS99thDefinition & 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 ›Loneliness
43%
in the top 1.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST94thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who report feeling lonely.
Full methodology ›Housing-cost burden
59.3%
in the top 1.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST97thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The share of households spending 30% or more of their income on housing.
Full methodology ›Homeownership rate
8.9%
in the bottom 1.3% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST3rdUS1stDefinition & source ›
The share of occupied homes that are owned, rather than rented, by the people living in them.
Full methodology ›Crowded housing
18.7%
in the top 1.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST93rdUS99thDefinition & source ›
The share of occupied homes with more than one person per room, the Census definition of crowded housing.
Full methodology ›Loud transportation noise
3.8%
in the top 2.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST84thUS98thDefinition & source ›
The modeled share of residents exposed to average road, rail, and aviation noise at or above 65 decibels — around the volume of normal conversation.
Full methodology ›Households without a vehicle
26%
in the top 3.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST97thUS97thDefinition & source ›
The share of households with no vehicle available.
Full methodology ›The read
ZIP 90005, one of several in Los Angeles, California, overall, ranks in the top 46% healthiest ZIPs nationally (14,606th) and the bottom 42% of California (992nd).
This area's measures are easy to read as a mixed set: subsidized affordable housing is in the top 0.5% nationally. Set against that, modeled colon screening sits in the bottom 1.2% nationally, expected annual loss lands in the top 0.2% nationally, and air-toxics cancer risk lies in the top 0.9% nationally. Modeled loneliness stands in the top 1.2% nationally, and housing-cost burden rests in the top 1.3% nationally. Homeownership registers in the bottom 1.3% nationally, and crowded housing resides in the top 1.4% nationally. Modeled loud transportation noise settles in the top 2.5% nationally, and households without a vehicle is in the top 3.0% nationally.
Measured against the nearby ZIPs, outer-floodplain exposure runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. Defined simply, expected annual loss is FEMA's modeled estimate, in dollars, of average yearly harm to people from natural hazards. Air-toxics cancer risk is a modeled EPA estimate of added lifetime cancer risk from breathing outdoor air, per million people. Subsidized affordable housing is the main federal tax-credit program (HUD) funding affordable rental housing, counted as local units it supports. ZIP 90010, just across the boundary, comes out healthier 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 Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim, CA 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%
Mental Health
healthier than 75%
8%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 87%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 88%
5%
About typical
Risk Behavior
healthier than 50%
11%
Holding it back
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 30%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 6%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 4%
13%
Disability
healthier than 35%
7%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 76%
21%
Mental Health
healthier than 73%
8%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 72%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 75%
5%
Holding it back
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 34%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 25%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 12%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 28%
11%
Disability
healthier than 33%
7%
Nothing measured is lifting this score.
About typical
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 52%
21%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 55%
14%
Mental Health
healthier than 49%
8%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 58%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 56%
5%
Holding it back
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 31%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 14%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 25%
11%
Disability
healthier than 25%
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
3 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.
Above what income predicts
The ZIP codes that outlive their incomes
Estimated life expectancy is 80.5 ± 1.3 years. A median household income of $49,419 predicts 77.3 years — 3.2 years above.
Ranked #367 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 5.9 (bottom 10%); chronic-disease standing 92.0 (top 10%) — 86 points apart, heavier on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #17,627 of the 18,187 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by the gap from cleanest environment to heaviest chronic burden, highest first.
Highest-risk tenth
Air toxics and the years between the two ends of the risk scale
Modeled air-toxics cancer risk is 50.0 cases per million — among the tenth of compared ZIP codes with the most. Estimated life expectancy is 80.5 ± 1.3 years.
Ranked #122 of the 4,173 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by modeled air-toxics risk, highest first.
Nearby & similar ZIPs
Editorially selected — see how this ZIP compares to nearby and similar places.
Nearby
90006
Californiashares a border
Score 43.10
Closest healthier
90010
Californiashares a border
Score 59.02
Similar health profile
90032
California99% similar profile
Score 50.99
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 | 16.9% | 15.5–18.3 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 29.1% | 27.1–30.9 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 3.9% | 3.5–4.2 |
| Current asthma among adults | 8.7% | 7.8–9.5 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 5.0% | 4.6–5.5 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 5.0% | 4.5–5.5 |
| Depression among adults | 18.4% | 16.6–20.1 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 13.5% | 12.3–14.8 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 36.2% | 34.0–38.3 |
| Obesity among adults | 25.3% | 22.7–27.9 |
| Stroke among adults | 3.2% | 2.9–3.4 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 14.0% | 11.7–16.3 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 14.1% | 12.5–15.8 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 68.8% | 66.4–71.0 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 69.7% | 67.3–72.1 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 80.6% | 78.8–82.3 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 47.4% | 43.9–50.6 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 51.7% | 49.1–54.1 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 71.2% | 65.7–76.0 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 13.7% | 12.2–15.3 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 13.3% | 11.9–14.8 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 30.7% | 28.2–33.2 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 38.5% | 35.5–41.4 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 27.6% | 25.7–29.6 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 17.2% | 15.8–18.7 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 14.6% | 13.4–15.9 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 17.3% | 15.9–18.8 |
| Any disability among adults | 33.2% | 30.9–35.6 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 5.5% | 4.9–6.0 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 9.9% | 9.1–10.9 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 15.0% | 13.7–16.3 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 5.0% | 4.6–5.4 |
| Vision disability among adults | 8.0% | 7.4–8.6 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 34.7% | 32.2–37.4 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 28.4% | 26.2–30.8 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 26.1% | 24.0–28.4 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 20.9% | 19.1–22.8 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 13.4% | 12.2–14.8 |
| Loneliness among adults | 43.0% | 40.4–45.9 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 9.9% | 8.8–11.1 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | CA median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 25.3% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 10.6% (4.1–24.9%) n=1,714 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 25.2% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 7.7% (1.7–17.9%) n=1,704 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 23.6% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 9.8% (1.4–30.9%) n=1,729 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 40.4% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 31.3% (9.9–68.2%) n=1,729 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 6.9% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 6.1% (0.8–12.0%) n=1,714 |
| Households without a vehicle | 26.0% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 4.5% (0.0–12.2%) n=1,708 |
| Broadband subscription | 91.0% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 93.4% (82.1–98.4%) n=1,708 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 59.3% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 38.6% (24.4–50.5%) n=1,708 |
| Homeownership rate | 8.9% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 64.1% (31.9–86.4%) n=1,708 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 18.7% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 4.8% (0.0–15.9%) n=1,708 |
| Foreign-born population | 53.9% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 18.9% (3.0–40.4%) n=1,730 |
| Single-parent households | 46.0% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 48.4% (35.1–72.3%) n=1,692 |
| Population 65+ | 12.6% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 17.0% (9.7–35.7%) n=1,730 |
| Median age | 35.2 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 40.1 yr (31.8–57.0) n=1,712 |
| Median household income | $49,419 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $93,448 ($54,188–$159,562) n=1,584 |
| Median home value | $975,200 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $659,800 ($300,520–$1,493,340) n=1,593 |
| Median gross rent | $1,715 | $1,021 ($677–$1,912) n=25,670 | $1,912 ($1,113–$2,923) n=1,461 |
Life expectancyNCHS / RWJF USALEEP · model-based
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | CA median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Life expectancy at birth | 80.5 yr ± 0.65 | 78.9 yr (74.7–82.8) n=31,308 | 80.5 yr (76.7–83.8) n=1,665 |
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 0.65 years of 80.5, 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