ZIP code
90755
in Signal Hill, CaliforniaPopulation 11,521
60.62/ 100
Ranked #4,394 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 13.8%)
Ranked #474 of 1,719 California ZIPs (top 28%)
Ranked #156 of 371 Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim, CA ZIPs (top 42%)
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.
Recreation access
2.1 per 1,000 residents
in the top 1.5% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST98thUS99thDefinition & 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 ›Loud transportation noise
4.2%
in the top 2.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST87thUS98thDefinition & 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 ›Transportation noise
22.4%
in the top 2.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST95thUS98thDefinition & 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 ›Walkability
190 intersections/sq mi
in the top 2.8% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST95thUS97thDefinition & source ›
The number of street intersections per square mile — a standard street-connectivity measure; denser networks correlate with more walkable neighborhoods.
Full methodology ›Floodplain exposure
0.00%
at the national minimum
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS1stDefinition & 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 ›Obesity
24.7%
in the bottom 5.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST25thUS5thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with obesity, defined as a body-mass index of 30 or higher.
Full methodology ›Loneliness
40.3%
in the top 3.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST85thUS96thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who report feeling lonely.
Full methodology ›Industrial-pollution burden
in the top 4.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS96thDefinition & 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 ›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 ›Hearing disability
4.5%
in the bottom 3.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST7thUS4thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who are deaf or have serious difficulty hearing.
Full methodology ›The read
In overall standing, Signal Hill, California (ZIP 90755) comes out in the top 13.8% healthiest ZIPs nationally (4,394th) and the top 28% of California (474th).
The measures fall on both sides of the ledger for this area: recreation sits in the top 1.5% nationally, walkability settles in the top 2.8% nationally, and floodplain exposure registers at the national minimum. Modeled obesity stands in the bottom 5.1% nationally, and hearing disability lands in the bottom 3.6% nationally. Set against that, modeled loud transportation noise is in the top 2.0% nationally, and transportation noise resides in the top 2.1% nationally. Modeled loneliness rests in the top 3.7% nationally, and industrial-pollution burden lies in the top 4.1% nationally. Modeled tree cover sits at the national minimum.
Relative to the ZIPs around it, walkability runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. In plain terms, industrial-pollution burden is the EPA's modeled screening score weighting industrial chemical releases by their toxicity and how many people live nearby. 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. The nearest healthier ZIP overall is ZIP 90815, 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 96%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 85%
16%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 79%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 84%
8%
Disability
healthier than 81%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 96%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 90%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
in the bottom 0.8%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 24%
13%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 87%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 79%
16%
Mental Health
healthier than 83%
8%
Disability
healthier than 76%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 94%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 78%
5%
About typical
Preventive Care
healthier than 47%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 59%
11%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 5%
14%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 81%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 74%
16%
Mental Health
healthier than 68%
8%
Disability
healthier than 66%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 95%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 63%
5%
About typical
Preventive Care
healthier than 54%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 53%
11%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 18%
14%
“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
One of our published findings lists 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.
Heavy environment, light chronic burden
Where the environment and chronic illness point in opposite directions
Environmental-hazard standing 0.8 (bottom 1%); chronic-disease standing 95.6 (top 10%) — 95 points apart, heavier on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #18,109 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
90804
Californiashares a border
Score 50.55
Closest healthier
90815
Californiashares a border
Score 61.80
Similar health profile
92705
California99% similar profile
Score 59.97
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 | 18.1% | 16.6–19.6 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 27.8% | 25.8–29.7 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 5.4% | 5.0–5.9 |
| Current asthma among adults | 9.1% | 8.2–10.0 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 4.2% | 3.8–4.6 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 4.0% | 3.5–4.4 |
| Depression among adults | 18.6% | 16.8–20.4 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 10.5% | 9.4–11.6 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 35.3% | 33.0–37.5 |
| Obesity among adults | 24.7% | 22.1–27.3 |
| Stroke among adults | 2.6% | 2.4–2.9 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 7.4% | 6.1–8.9 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 8.3% | 6.9–10.0 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 70.1% | 67.5–72.6 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 72.2% | 69.9–74.5 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 86.3% | 84.8–87.7 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 57.2% | 53.8–60.2 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 65.1% | 62.7–67.4 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 78.4% | 73.8–82.3 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 15.5% | 13.9–17.2 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 9.8% | 8.6–11.1 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 21.6% | 19.3–23.9 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 36.4% | 33.5–39.2 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 19.3% | 17.5–21.2 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 15.6% | 14.2–17.1 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 12.1% | 10.9–13.3 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 13.4% | 12.0–14.8 |
| Any disability among adults | 26.7% | 24.3–29.0 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 4.5% | 4.0–5.0 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 7.0% | 6.3–7.8 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 11.5% | 10.3–12.6 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 3.4% | 3.1–3.7 |
| Vision disability among adults | 4.7% | 4.3–5.2 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 31.2% | 28.8–34.1 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 16.3% | 14.3–18.5 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 13.7% | 11.9–15.6 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 14.7% | 13.0–16.6 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 8.4% | 7.5–9.5 |
| Loneliness among adults | 40.3% | 37.7–43.4 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 6.5% | 5.7–7.4 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | CA median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 7.0% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 10.6% (4.1–24.9%) n=1,714 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 7.7% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 7.7% (1.7–17.9%) n=1,704 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 12.0% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 9.8% (1.4–30.9%) n=1,729 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 37.4% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 31.3% (9.9–68.2%) n=1,729 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 4.9% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 6.1% (0.8–12.0%) n=1,714 |
| Households without a vehicle | 2.8% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 4.5% (0.0–12.2%) n=1,708 |
| Broadband subscription | 92.0% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 93.4% (82.1–98.4%) n=1,708 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 35.0% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 38.6% (24.4–50.5%) n=1,708 |
| Homeownership rate | 50.5% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 64.1% (31.9–86.4%) n=1,708 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 3.5% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 4.8% (0.0–15.9%) n=1,708 |
| Foreign-born population | 27.2% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 18.9% (3.0–40.4%) n=1,730 |
| Single-parent households | 41.5% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 48.4% (35.1–72.3%) n=1,692 |
| Population 65+ | 12.7% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 17.0% (9.7–35.7%) n=1,730 |
| Median age | 41.9 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 40.1 yr (31.8–57.0) n=1,712 |
| Median household income | $113,512 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $93,448 ($54,188–$159,562) n=1,584 |
| Median home value | $787,300 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $659,800 ($300,520–$1,493,340) n=1,593 |
| Median gross rent | $1,851 | $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 | 79.1 yr ± 1.34 | 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 1.34 years of 79.1, 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