ZIP code
91040
in Sunland, CaliforniaPopulation 20,821
55.75/ 100
Ranked #8,570 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 27%)
Ranked #736 of 1,719 California ZIPs (top 43%)
Ranked #221 of 371 Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim, CA ZIPs (bottom 40%)
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
3.1%
in the top 3.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST77thUS96thDefinition & 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 ›Housing-cost burden
47.2%
in the top 4.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST84thUS96thDefinition & source ›
The share of households spending 30% or more of their income on housing.
Full methodology ›Obesity
25.9%
in the bottom 7.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST32ndUS7thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with obesity, defined as a body-mass index of 30 or higher.
Full methodology ›Park land
21%
in the top 6.6% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST81stUS93rdDefinition & source ›
The share of this ZIP’s land area that is public parkland.
Full methodology ›Loneliness
38.5%
in the top 7.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST73rdUS93rdDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who report feeling lonely.
Full methodology ›Lithium in drinking water
58 µg/L
in the top 9.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST96thUS90thDefinition & source ›
The average detected level of lithium — a natural trace metal with no federal drinking-water limit yet — across the public water systems serving this ZIP, in micrograms per liter.
Measured from EPA records for the public water systems that serve this ZIP. Households on private wells — roughly 30% of the US population — are not covered by this measure, and this figure says nothing about their water.
Full methodology ›Fiber broadband
77.3%
in the top 25% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST92ndUS75thDefinition & source ›
The share of homes where fiber-optic internet service is available.
Full methodology ›The read
Sunland, California (ZIP 91040), overall, ranks in the top 27% healthiest ZIPs nationally (8,570th) and the top 43% of California (736th).
Reading the numbers as a whole, this area's strong points come through first: modeled obesity lands in the bottom 7.0% nationally, and park land lies in the top 6.6% nationally. Distance to a community health center stands at the national minimum, shared with about 23% of ZIPs. Distance to a nursing home rests at the national minimum, shared with about 27% of ZIPs. Set against that, modeled loud transportation noise registers in the top 3.7% nationally, and housing-cost burden resides in the top 4.3% nationally. Modeled loneliness settles in the top 7.3% nationally, and lithium in drinking water is in the top 9.7% nationally. Crowded housing sits in the top 12.2% nationally, and modeled transportation noise lands in the top 12.5% nationally.
Measured against the nearby ZIPs, park land runs far lower than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. Defined simply, lithium in drinking water is a natural metal that dissolves into some groundwater and has no federal drinking-water limit yet. 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. Distance to a community health center is a federally funded (HRSA) community health center serving everyone regardless of ability to pay. ZIP 91504, about 0.2 miles away, 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 80%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 61%
16%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 77%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 61%
8%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 90%
5%
About typical
Disability
healthier than 57%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 53%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 14%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 36%
13%
Lifting this score
Healthcare Access
healthier than 79%
5%
About typical
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 48%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 58%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 43%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 58%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 56%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 56%
8%
Disability
healthier than 54%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 40%
5%
Nothing measured is holding this score back.
Lifting this score
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 71%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 65%
13%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 66%
5%
About typical
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 52%
16%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 52%
11%
Disability
healthier than 41%
7%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 12%
21%
Mental Health
healthier than 30%
8%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 14%
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
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 14.0; chronic-disease standing 80.4 — 66 points apart, heavier on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #16,063 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
91042
Californiashares a border
Score 54.04
Closest healthier
91504
Californiaabout 0.2 mi away
Score 59.88
Similar health profile
90815
California96% similar profile
Score 61.80
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 | 24.0% | 22.2–25.8 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 32.0% | 29.8–34.0 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 8.2% | 7.6–8.9 |
| Current asthma among adults | 9.7% | 8.8–10.7 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 6.0% | 5.5–6.6 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 6.0% | 5.4–6.7 |
| Depression among adults | 21.7% | 19.7–23.7 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 11.5% | 10.4–12.7 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 39.1% | 36.7–41.4 |
| Obesity among adults | 25.9% | 23.2–28.6 |
| Stroke among adults | 3.4% | 3.2–3.7 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 8.5% | 7.0–10.1 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 7.8% | 6.8–8.8 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 73.8% | 71.2–76.1 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 73.3% | 71.0–75.5 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 86.9% | 85.6–88.3 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 61.2% | 57.8–64.3 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 67.3% | 64.8–69.4 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 76.6% | 71.7–80.8 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 16.2% | 14.5–18.0 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 12.0% | 10.5–13.5 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 22.6% | 20.4–24.8 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 33.3% | 30.5–36.0 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 21.4% | 19.6–23.3 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 16.5% | 15.1–18.0 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 14.5% | 13.2–15.8 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 14.6% | 13.3–16.0 |
| Any disability among adults | 31.2% | 28.8–33.5 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 6.5% | 5.9–7.2 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 8.3% | 7.5–9.2 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 14.6% | 13.3–16.1 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 4.1% | 3.7–4.5 |
| Vision disability among adults | 5.2% | 4.7–5.6 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 28.0% | 25.8–30.6 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 14.5% | 12.9–16.2 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 13.3% | 11.7–15.0 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 12.4% | 11.1–13.9 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 7.7% | 6.9–8.6 |
| Loneliness among adults | 38.5% | 35.8–41.4 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 5.7% | 5.0–6.4 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | CA median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 9.0% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 10.6% (4.1–24.9%) n=1,714 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 8.3% | 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+) | 31.0% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 31.3% (9.9–68.2%) n=1,729 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 7.1% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 6.1% (0.8–12.0%) n=1,714 |
| Households without a vehicle | 6.1% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 4.5% (0.0–12.2%) n=1,708 |
| Broadband subscription | 95.8% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 93.4% (82.1–98.4%) n=1,708 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 47.2% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 38.6% (24.4–50.5%) n=1,708 |
| Homeownership rate | 66.5% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 64.1% (31.9–86.4%) n=1,708 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 5.5% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 4.8% (0.0–15.9%) n=1,708 |
| Foreign-born population | 32.4% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 18.9% (3.0–40.4%) n=1,730 |
| Single-parent households | 46.3% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 48.4% (35.1–72.3%) n=1,692 |
| Population 65+ | 21.8% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 17.0% (9.7–35.7%) n=1,730 |
| Median age | 44.6 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 40.1 yr (31.8–57.0) n=1,712 |
| Median household income | $98,256 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $93,448 ($54,188–$159,562) n=1,584 |
| Median home value | $861,600 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $659,800 ($300,520–$1,493,340) n=1,593 |
| Median gross rent | $1,830 | $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 | 80.6 yr ± 0.64 | 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 0.64 years of 80.6, 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