ZIP code
90807
in Long Beach, CaliforniaPopulation 33,101
58.88/ 100
Ranked #5,690 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 18%)
Ranked #568 of 1,719 California ZIPs (top 33%)
Ranked #177 of 371 Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim, CA ZIPs (top 48%)
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.
Transportation noise
47.6%
in the top 0.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & 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 ›Loud transportation noise
3.9%
in the top 2.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST85thUS98thDefinition & 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 ›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 ›Dental provider access
1.3 per 1,000 residents
in the top 3.4% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST91stUS97thDefinition & 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 ›Industrial-pollution burden
in the top 3.6% 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 ›Obesity
25.3%
in the bottom 6.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST28thUS6thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with obesity, defined as a body-mass index of 30 or higher.
Full methodology ›Physician access
2.6 per 1,000 residents
in the top 4.6% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST93rdUS95thDefinition & source ›
The number of physicians’ 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 ›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 ›Fine-particle (PM2.5) exceedance
1.7%
in the top 5.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST62ndUS95thDefinition & 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 ›Loneliness
39.2%
in the top 5.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST79thUS94thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who report feeling lonely.
Full methodology ›The read
Overall, ZIP 90807, one of several in Long Beach, California places in the top 18% healthiest ZIPs nationally (5,690th) and the top 33% of California (568th).
The measures land in both directions, and neither dominates: floodplain exposure lies at the national minimum, and dental providers rests in the top 3.4% nationally. Modeled obesity resides in the bottom 6.0% nationally, and physicians is in the top 4.6% nationally. Pulling the other way, modeled transportation noise lands in the top 0.5% nationally, loud transportation noise stands in the top 2.3% nationally, and industrial-pollution burden registers in the top 3.6% nationally. Modeled tree cover settles at the national minimum, fine-particle sits in the top 5.2% nationally, and loneliness lies in the top 5.7% nationally.
Beside the areas that surround it, transportation noise runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. For readers new to these terms, industrial-pollution burden is the EPA's modeled screening score weighting industrial chemical releases by their toxicity and how many people live nearby. Fine-particle is fine airborne particles about one-thirtieth the width of a hair, counted on modeled days above the EPA standard. Transportation noise is the modeled share of an area exposed to average road, rail, and air noise at or above 55 decibels. Among nearby ZIPs, the nearest healthier one overall is ZIP 90712, 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 90%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 69%
16%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 83%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 84%
8%
Disability
healthier than 74%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 96%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 89%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
in the bottom 0.6%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 38%
13%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 70%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 64%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 61%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 66%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 83%
8%
Disability
healthier than 69%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 93%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 77%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 4%
14%
Lifting this score
Preventive Care
healthier than 68%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 61%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 68%
8%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 94%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 60%
5%
About typical
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 42%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 58%
16%
Disability
healthier than 58%
7%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 14%
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
2 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 what income predicts
The ZIP codes that outlive their incomes
Estimated life expectancy is 78.7 ± 1.0 years. A median household income of $103,777 predicts 80.2 years — 1.5 years below.
Ranked #1,861 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 0.6 (bottom 1%); chronic-disease standing 90.1 (top 10%) — 90 points apart, heavier on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #17,846 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
90712
Californiashares a border
Score 61.47
Closest healthier
90755
Californiashares a border
Score 60.62
Similar health profile
90620
California99% similar profile
Score 57.79
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 | 21.0% | 19.4–22.6 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 30.7% | 28.6–32.8 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 6.7% | 6.2–7.3 |
| Current asthma among adults | 9.4% | 8.5–10.4 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 5.0% | 4.6–5.5 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 4.6% | 4.1–5.1 |
| Depression among adults | 19.1% | 17.2–20.9 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 11.4% | 10.3–12.5 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 37.1% | 34.7–39.4 |
| Obesity among adults | 25.3% | 22.6–28.0 |
| Stroke among adults | 3.1% | 2.9–3.4 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 7.0% | 5.7–8.4 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 7.4% | 6.5–8.4 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 73.3% | 70.8–75.5 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 74.2% | 71.9–76.3 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 87.6% | 86.4–88.8 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 59.7% | 56.3–62.8 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 66.6% | 64.2–68.8 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 77.7% | 72.9–81.8 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 14.8% | 13.2–16.5 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 9.8% | 8.7–11.1 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 21.8% | 19.7–23.8 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 35.5% | 32.6–38.3 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 19.8% | 18.2–21.5 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 15.3% | 14.0–16.7 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 12.7% | 11.6–13.9 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 13.1% | 11.9–14.3 |
| Any disability among adults | 28.1% | 25.9–30.4 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 5.3% | 4.8–5.8 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 7.5% | 6.8–8.2 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 13.0% | 11.8–14.2 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 3.7% | 3.4–4.0 |
| Vision disability among adults | 4.9% | 4.5–5.3 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 29.6% | 27.2–32.1 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 15.3% | 13.8–17.0 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 13.5% | 12.0–15.1 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 13.6% | 12.1–15.1 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 8.0% | 7.2–9.0 |
| Loneliness among adults | 39.2% | 36.5–42.1 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 6.3% | 5.5–7.1 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | CA median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 9.2% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 10.6% (4.1–24.9%) n=1,714 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 6.0% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 7.7% (1.7–17.9%) n=1,704 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 9.0% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 9.8% (1.4–30.9%) n=1,729 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 46.6% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 31.3% (9.9–68.2%) n=1,729 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 5.9% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 6.1% (0.8–12.0%) n=1,714 |
| Households without a vehicle | 6.4% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 4.5% (0.0–12.2%) n=1,708 |
| Broadband subscription | 93.6% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 93.4% (82.1–98.4%) n=1,708 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 38.7% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 38.6% (24.4–50.5%) n=1,708 |
| Homeownership rate | 57.0% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 64.1% (31.9–86.4%) n=1,708 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 6.3% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 4.8% (0.0–15.9%) n=1,708 |
| Foreign-born population | 21.1% | 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+ | 15.8% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 17.0% (9.7–35.7%) n=1,730 |
| Median age | 39.9 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 40.1 yr (31.8–57.0) n=1,712 |
| Median household income | $103,777 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $93,448 ($54,188–$159,562) n=1,584 |
| Median home value | $884,500 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $659,800 ($300,520–$1,493,340) n=1,593 |
| Median gross rent | $1,947 | $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 | 78.7 yr ± 0.53 | 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 0.53 years of 78.7, 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