ZIP code
90008
in Los Angeles, CaliforniaPopulation 33,252
50.23/ 100
Ranked #15,916 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 50%)
Ranked #1,054 of 1,719 California ZIPs (bottom 39%)
Ranked #283 of 371 Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim, CA ZIPs (bottom 24%)
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.
Loneliness
42.6%
in the top 1.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST93rdUS99thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who report feeling lonely.
Full methodology ›Air-toxics cancer risk
41 per million
in the top 1.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST86thUS98thDefinition & 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 ›Housing-cost burden
52.7%
in the top 2.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST93rdUS98thDefinition & source ›
The share of households spending 30% or more of their income on housing.
Full methodology ›Homeownership rate
30.6%
in the bottom 3.3% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST9thUS3rdDefinition & source ›
The share of occupied homes that are owned, rather than rented, by the people living in them.
Full methodology ›Loud transportation noise
3.2%
in the top 3.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST78thUS97thDefinition & 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 ›Tree cover
0.00%
at the national minimum
Higher is healthier
ST1stUS1stDefinition & source ›
The share of this ZIP’s land area covered by forest.
Full methodology ›Expected annual disaster loss
$0
in the top 5.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST75thUS94thDefinition & 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 ›Crowded housing
8.7%
in the top 5.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST71stUS94thDefinition & source ›
The share of occupied homes with more than one person per room, the Census definition of crowded housing.
Full methodology ›Fine-particle (PM2.5) exceedance
1.6%
in the top 6.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST60thUS94thDefinition & 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 ›Housing insecurity
22.2%
in the top 6.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST86thUS94thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who experienced housing insecurity in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›The read
Overall, ZIP 90008, one of several in Los Angeles, California places in the top 50% healthiest ZIPs nationally (15,916th) and the bottom 39% of California (1,054th).
The measures land in both directions, and neither dominates: modeled loneliness stands in the top 1.5% nationally. Pulling the other way, modeled air-toxics cancer risk registers in the top 1.9% nationally, and housing-cost burden settles in the top 2.3% nationally. Homeownership sits in the bottom 3.3% nationally, modeled loud transportation noise lies in the top 3.3% nationally, and modeled tree cover rests at the national minimum. Modeled expected annual loss resides in the top 5.8% nationally, crowded housing is in the top 5.9% nationally, and modeled fine-particle lands in the top 6.1% nationally. Modeled housing insecurity stands in the top 6.3% nationally.
Beside the areas that surround it, expected annual loss runs far lower than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. For readers new to these terms, air-toxics cancer risk is a modeled EPA estimate of added lifetime cancer risk from breathing outdoor air, per million people. Expected annual loss is FEMA's modeled estimate, in dollars, of average yearly harm to people from natural hazards. Fine-particle is fine airborne particles about one-thirtieth the width of a hair, counted on modeled days above the EPA standard. Among nearby ZIPs, the nearest healthier one overall is ZIP 90056, 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 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 62%
21%
Mental Health
healthier than 69%
8%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 90%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 84%
5%
About typical
Preventive Care
healthier than 41%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 55%
11%
Holding it back
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 14%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 9%
14%
Disability
healthier than 28%
7%
Lifting this score
Preventive Care
healthier than 62%
13%
Mental Health
healthier than 65%
8%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 78%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 67%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 28%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 20%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 34%
14%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 31%
11%
Disability
healthier than 27%
7%
Lifting this score
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 62%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 69%
13%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 70%
5%
About typical
Healthcare Access
healthier than 41%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 4%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 16%
16%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 28%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 38%
8%
Disability
healthier than 18%
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.
Below its nearby ZIPs
The ZIP codes that outlive their neighbors
Estimated life expectancy is 77.8 ± 1.1 years. The 45 nearest ZIP codes with estimates average 80.4 years — 2.6 years below them.
Ranked #2,018 of the 3,687 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by years above the nearby-ZIP average, highest first.
Heavy environment, light chronic burden
Where the environment and chronic illness point in opposite directions
Environmental-hazard standing 9.2 (bottom 10%); chronic-disease standing 62.3 — 53 points apart, heavier on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #14,700 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 41.0 cases per million — among the tenth of compared ZIP codes with the most. Estimated life expectancy is 77.8 ± 1.1 years.
Ranked #389 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
90016
Californiashares a border
Score 49.42
Closest healthier
90056
Californiashares a border
Score 64.20
Similar health profile
18013
Pennsylvania94% similar profile
Score 50.14
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 | 24.2% | 22.4–26.1 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 39.3% | 37.0–41.4 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 5.5% | 5.1–6.0 |
| Current asthma among adults | 11.5% | 10.4–12.7 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 5.9% | 5.3–6.4 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 5.9% | 5.3–6.6 |
| Depression among adults | 18.8% | 17.0–20.7 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 15.4% | 14.0–16.8 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 36.2% | 33.9–38.5 |
| Obesity among adults | 33.0% | 29.9–36.1 |
| Stroke among adults | 4.7% | 4.3–5.0 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 11.7% | 9.7–13.7 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 9.5% | 8.4–10.6 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 76.5% | 74.5–78.4 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 77.0% | 74.9–78.9 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 86.9% | 85.6–88.1 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 60.4% | 57.0–63.5 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 58.3% | 55.8–60.6 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 79.4% | 75.0–83.2 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 12.7% | 11.3–14.2 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 12.7% | 11.4–14.1 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 27.3% | 25.0–29.8 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 41.9% | 38.8–44.9 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 26.6% | 24.7–28.6 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 17.7% | 16.3–19.3 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 14.9% | 13.7–16.3 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 16.3% | 14.9–17.8 |
| Any disability among adults | 34.6% | 32.3–37.1 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 4.9% | 4.4–5.4 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 10.8% | 9.9–11.8 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 18.4% | 16.9–20.0 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 6.1% | 5.6–6.6 |
| Vision disability among adults | 7.6% | 7.0–8.3 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 34.4% | 31.8–37.2 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 25.7% | 23.5–28.1 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 27.1% | 25.0–29.7 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 22.2% | 20.3–24.4 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 13.3% | 12.0–14.7 |
| Loneliness among adults | 42.6% | 39.9–45.7 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 12.0% | 10.7–13.4 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | CA median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 17.9% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 10.6% (4.1–24.9%) n=1,714 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 9.7% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 7.7% (1.7–17.9%) n=1,704 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 12.1% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 9.8% (1.4–30.9%) n=1,729 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 32.9% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 31.3% (9.9–68.2%) n=1,729 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 8.0% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 6.1% (0.8–12.0%) n=1,714 |
| Households without a vehicle | 16.1% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 4.5% (0.0–12.2%) n=1,708 |
| Broadband subscription | 91.4% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 93.4% (82.1–98.4%) n=1,708 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 52.7% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 38.6% (24.4–50.5%) n=1,708 |
| Homeownership rate | 30.6% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 64.1% (31.9–86.4%) n=1,708 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 8.7% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 4.8% (0.0–15.9%) n=1,708 |
| Foreign-born population | 19.6% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 18.9% (3.0–40.4%) n=1,730 |
| Single-parent households | 39.3% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 48.4% (35.1–72.3%) n=1,692 |
| Population 65+ | 17.8% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 17.0% (9.7–35.7%) n=1,730 |
| Median age | 41.8 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 40.1 yr (31.8–57.0) n=1,712 |
| Median household income | $61,846 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $93,448 ($54,188–$159,562) n=1,584 |
| Median home value | $1,040,600 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $659,800 ($300,520–$1,493,340) n=1,593 |
| Median gross rent | $1,612 | $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 | 77.8 yr ± 0.55 | 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 0.55 years of 77.8, 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