ZIP code
90064
in Los Angeles, CaliforniaPopulation 26,642
68.53/ 100
Ranked #878 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 2.8%)
Ranked #134 of 1,719 California ZIPs (top 7.8%)
Ranked #30 of 371 Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim, CA ZIPs (top 8.1%)
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.
Loud transportation noise
9.4%
in the top 0.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & 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 ›Obesity
20.9%
in the bottom 1.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST9thUS1stDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with obesity, defined as a body-mass index of 30 or higher.
Full methodology ›Transportation noise
28.3%
in the top 1.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST97thUS99thDefinition & 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 ›Air-toxics cancer risk
42.2 per million
in the top 1.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST87thUS98thDefinition & 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 ›Mental-health provider access
0.33 per 1,000 residents
in the top 1.8% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST98thUS98thDefinition & source ›
The number of mental-health clinics located inside this ZIP’s boundary, per 1,000 residents.
Counted from establishments located inside this ZIP’s boundary, so one just across the line is not counted. Where a ZIP has too few residents for the density to be reliable, no value is published rather than an unreliable one.
Full methodology ›Dental provider access
1.7 per 1,000 residents
in the top 1.8% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST95thUS98thDefinition & source ›
The number of dental offices located inside this ZIP’s boundary, per 1,000 residents.
Counted from establishments located inside this ZIP’s boundary, so one just across the line is not counted. Where a ZIP has too few residents for the density to be reliable, no value is published rather than an unreliable one.
Full methodology ›Utility shut-off threat
3.7%
in the bottom 2.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST7thUS2ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults whose household was threatened with a utility shut-off in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Recreation access
1.7 per 1,000 residents
in the top 2.5% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST95thUS98thDefinition & source ›
The number of places for physical recreation — gyms, sports, and fitness venues — inside this ZIP’s boundary, per 1,000 residents.
Counted from establishments located inside this ZIP’s boundary, so one just across the line is not counted. Where a ZIP has too few residents for the density to be reliable, no value is published rather than an unreliable one.
Full methodology ›Outpatient-care access
0.83 per 1,000 residents
in the top 2.8% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST96thUS97thDefinition & source ›
The number of outpatient clinics located inside this ZIP’s boundary, per 1,000 residents.
Counted from establishments located inside this ZIP’s boundary, so one just across the line is not counted. Where a ZIP has too few residents for the density to be reliable, no value is published rather than an unreliable one.
Full methodology ›Transit access
6.1 per 1,000 residents
in the top 3.5% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST97thUS97thDefinition & source ›
The number of public-transit stops inside this ZIP’s boundary, per 1,000 residents.
Counted from establishments located inside this ZIP’s boundary, so one just across the line is not counted. Where a ZIP has too few residents for the density to be reliable, no value is published rather than an unreliable one.
Full methodology ›The read
Judged by its overall standing, ZIP 90064, one of several in Los Angeles, California sits in the top 2.8% healthiest ZIPs nationally (878th) and the top 7.8% of California (134th).
A balanced showing across the data, with a few readings each side: modeled obesity stands in the bottom 1.3% nationally, mental-health providers resides in the top 1.8% nationally, and dental providers sits in the top 1.8% nationally. Modeled utility shutoff stands in the bottom 2.3% nationally, recreation resides in the top 2.5% nationally, and outpatient sits in the top 2.8% nationally. Transit stands in the top 3.5% nationally. On the other hand, modeled loud transportation noise resides in the top 0.4% nationally, and transportation noise sits in the top 1.4% nationally. Modeled air-toxics cancer risk stands in the top 1.8% nationally.
Placed beside its immediate neighbors, loud transportation noise runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. Put plainly, air-toxics cancer risk is a modeled EPA estimate of added lifetime cancer risk from breathing outdoor air, per million people. Loud transportation noise is the modeled share of an area exposed to road, rail, and air noise at or above 65 decibels, near conversation volume. Transportation noise is the modeled share of an area exposed to average road, rail, and air noise at or above 55 decibels. A healthier nearby ZIP overall is ZIP 90049, about 0.8 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 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 97%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 97%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 62%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 95%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 90%
8%
Disability
healthier than 95%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 76%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 78%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 5%
14%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 92%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 95%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 79%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 90%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 90%
8%
Disability
healthier than 93%
7%
About typical
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 56%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 57%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 24%
14%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 90%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 97%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 84%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 91%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 83%
8%
Disability
healthier than 93%
7%
About typical
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 53%
14%
Holding it back
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 32%
5%
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
4 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 83.7 ± 1.4 years. A median household income of $135,383 predicts 81.3 years — 2.4 years above.
Ranked #694 of the 5,842 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by years above what income predicts, highest first.
Above its nearby ZIPs
The ZIP codes that outlive their neighbors
Estimated life expectancy is 83.7 ± 1.4 years. The 46 nearest ZIP codes with estimates average 81.3 years — 2.4 years above them.
Ranked #1,179 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 5.6 (bottom 10%); chronic-disease standing 96.8 (top 10%) — 91 points apart, heavier on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #17,945 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 42.2 cases per million — among the tenth of compared ZIP codes with the most. Estimated life expectancy is 83.7 ± 1.4 years.
Ranked #350 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
90025
Californiashares a border
Score 66.74
Closest healthier
90049
Californiaabout 0.8 mi away
Score 70.47
Similar health profile
90277
California100% similar profile
Score 67.80
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 | 19.2% | 17.7–20.8 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 26.5% | 24.6–28.4 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 7.7% | 7.1–8.3 |
| Current asthma among adults | 8.7% | 7.9–9.6 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 4.3% | 3.9–4.7 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 3.5% | 3.1–3.9 |
| Depression among adults | 19.5% | 17.6–21.4 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 8.3% | 7.5–9.2 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 35.8% | 33.5–38.0 |
| Obesity among adults | 20.9% | 18.5–23.3 |
| Stroke among adults | 2.3% | 2.2–2.5 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 3.3% | 2.6–4.0 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 4.4% | 3.8–5.0 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 71.9% | 69.4–74.2 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 73.8% | 71.5–75.9 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 88.6% | 87.4–89.7 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 63.6% | 60.4–66.6 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 73.5% | 71.3–75.4 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 79.7% | 75.1–83.4 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 16.7% | 15.0–18.6 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 6.9% | 6.1–7.9 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 15.5% | 13.9–17.1 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 31.0% | 28.3–33.6 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 13.8% | 12.6–15.1 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 13.5% | 12.3–14.8 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 10.0% | 9.1–11.0 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 10.3% | 9.3–11.3 |
| Any disability among adults | 22.6% | 20.7–24.5 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 4.9% | 4.4–5.4 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 5.4% | 4.9–6.0 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 9.2% | 8.3–10.2 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 2.4% | 2.2–2.6 |
| Vision disability among adults | 3.2% | 2.9–3.5 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 24.7% | 22.5–26.9 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 8.4% | 7.5–9.5 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 6.9% | 6.0–8.0 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 7.9% | 7.0–8.9 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 5.1% | 4.6–5.7 |
| Loneliness among adults | 36.2% | 33.5–39.0 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 3.7% | 3.2–4.2 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | CA median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 7.8% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 10.6% (4.1–24.9%) n=1,714 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 4.1% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 7.7% (1.7–17.9%) n=1,704 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 4.5% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 9.8% (1.4–30.9%) n=1,729 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 70.5% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 31.3% (9.9–68.2%) n=1,729 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 5.4% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 6.1% (0.8–12.0%) n=1,714 |
| Households without a vehicle | 5.1% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 4.5% (0.0–12.2%) n=1,708 |
| Broadband subscription | 97.5% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 93.4% (82.1–98.4%) n=1,708 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 40.9% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 38.6% (24.4–50.5%) n=1,708 |
| Homeownership rate | 49.5% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 64.1% (31.9–86.4%) n=1,708 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 3.7% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 4.8% (0.0–15.9%) n=1,708 |
| Foreign-born population | 23.7% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 18.9% (3.0–40.4%) n=1,730 |
| Single-parent households | 54.1% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 48.4% (35.1–72.3%) n=1,692 |
| Population 65+ | 18.3% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 17.0% (9.7–35.7%) n=1,730 |
| Median age | 39.3 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 40.1 yr (31.8–57.0) n=1,712 |
| Median household income | $135,383 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $93,448 ($54,188–$159,562) n=1,584 |
| Median home value | $1,765,300 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $659,800 ($300,520–$1,493,340) n=1,593 |
| Median gross rent | $2,855 | $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 | 83.7 yr ± 0.71 | 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 0.71 years of 83.7, 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