Skip to main content
ZipVitals

ZIP code

91326

in Porter Ranch, CaliforniaPopulation 38,428

67.88/ 100

Ranked #1,044 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 3.3%)

Ranked #155 of 1,719 California ZIPs (top 9.1%)

Ranked #43 of 371 Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim, CA ZIPs (top 11.6%)

Ranks are modeled estimates — ZIPs a few hundred places apart are effectively tied.

Robust across all 9 health domains

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.

Obesity

20.2%

in the bottom 1.0% nationally

Lower is healthier

ST7th
US1st
Definition & source ›

The estimated share of adults with obesity, defined as a body-mass index of 30 or higher.

Full methodology ›

Median household income

$148,281

in the top 4.1% nationally

Higher is healthier

ST87th
US96th
Definition & source ›

The middle household income in this ZIP — half of households earn more, half earn less — in dollars per year.

Full methodology ›

Utility shut-off threat

3.8%

in the bottom 2.8% nationally

Lower is healthier

ST8th
US3rd
Definition & source ›

The estimated share of adults whose household was threatened with a utility shut-off in the past 12 months.

Full methodology ›

Natural-disaster risk

in the top 3.8% nationally

Lower is healthier

ST85th
US96th
Definition & source ›

This area’s national rank on its single highest non-flood natural hazard — such as wildfire, tornado, or earthquake — in FEMA’s modeled National Risk Index; flooding is shown separately.

Full methodology ›

Expected annual disaster loss

$0

in the top 5.9% nationally

Lower is healthier

ST74th
US94th
Definition & 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 ›

Housing-cost burden

43.5%

in the top 6.6% nationally

Lower is healthier

ST73rd
US93rd
Definition & source ›

The share of households spending 30% or more of their income on housing.

Full methodology ›

Tooth loss

4.8%

in the bottom 1.8% nationally

Lower is healthier

ST7th
US2nd
Definition & source ›

The estimated share of adults aged 65 and older who have lost all of their natural teeth.

Full methodology ›

Cognitive disability

10.4%

in the bottom 6.8% nationally

Lower is healthier

ST9th
US7th
Definition & source ›

The estimated share of adults with serious difficulty concentrating, remembering, or making decisions.

Full methodology ›

Home broadband subscription

97.3%

in the top 9.4% nationally

Higher is healthier

ST84th
US91st
Definition & source ›

The share of households with a broadband internet subscription.

Full methodology ›

Lithium in drinking water

58 µg/L

in the top 9.7% nationally

Lower is healthier

ST96th
US90th
Definition & 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 ›

The read

By the composite health measure, Porter Ranch, California (ZIP 91326) ranks in the top 3.3% healthiest ZIPs nationally (1,044th) and the top 9.1% of California (155th).

continue reading

The picture here is genuinely mixed, with readings on both sides: modeled obesity stands in the bottom 1.0% nationally, and household income lies in the top 4.1% nationally. Modeled utility shutoff lands in the bottom 2.8% nationally, and tooth loss sits in the bottom 1.8% nationally. Modeled cognitive disability is in the bottom 6.8% nationally, and home broadband subscription settles in the top 9.4% nationally. On the other side, modeled disaster risk resides in the top 3.8% nationally, modeled expected annual loss registers in the top 5.9% nationally, and housing-cost burden rests in the top 6.6% nationally. Lithium in drinking water stands in the top 9.7% nationally.

Read against the ZIPs closest to it, park land runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. To spell things out, disaster risk is the area's national rank on its highest non-flood peril in FEMA's modeled Risk Index, like wildfire or quake. Expected annual loss is FEMA's modeled estimate, in dollars, of average yearly harm to people from natural hazards. Lithium in drinking water is a natural metal that dissolves into some groundwater and has no federal drinking-water limit yet. Close by, ZIP 91302, about 7.7 miles away, ranks 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.

Compare within

Lifting this score

Chronic Disease Burden

healthier than 94%

21%

Social Need / SDOH

healthier than 77%

16%

Preventive Care

healthier than 65%

13%

Risk Behavior

healthier than 95%

11%

Mental Health

healthier than 95%

8%

Disability

healthier than 91%

7%

Climate / Disaster Risk

healthier than 76%

5%

Healthcare Access

healthier than 75%

5%

About typical

Environmental Hazard

healthier than 42%

14%

Nothing measured is holding this score back.

Lifting this score

Chronic Disease Burden

healthier than 82%

21%

Social Need / SDOH

healthier than 71%

16%

Environmental Hazard

healthier than 68%

14%

Preventive Care

healthier than 82%

13%

Risk Behavior

healthier than 90%

11%

Mental Health

healthier than 95%

8%

Disability

healthier than 87%

7%

About typical

Climate / Disaster Risk

healthier than 55%

5%

Healthcare Access

healthier than 52%

5%

Nothing measured is holding this score back.

Lifting this score

Chronic Disease Burden

healthier than 67%

21%

Social Need / SDOH

healthier than 65%

16%

Environmental Hazard

healthier than 88%

14%

Preventive Care

healthier than 86%

13%

Risk Behavior

healthier than 91%

11%

Mental Health

healthier than 91%

8%

Disability

healthier than 84%

7%

Holding it back

Climate / Disaster Risk

healthier than 32%

5%

Healthcare Access

healthier than 17%

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

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.

  • Above what income predicts

    The ZIP codes that outlive their incomes

    Estimated life expectancy is 84.2 ± 1.4 years. A median household income of $148,281 predicts 81.6 years — 2.6 years above.

    Ranked #607 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 84.2 ± 1.4 years. The 47 nearest ZIP codes with estimates average 81.7 years — 2.5 years above them.

    Ranked #1,140 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 42.0; chronic-disease standing 94.1 (top 10%) — 52 points apart, heavier on the environment than it is on chronic illness.

    Ranked #14,597 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.

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
MeasureCrude prevalence95% CI
Arthritis among adults20.8%19.2–22.5
High blood pressure among adults29.5%27.5–31.7
Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults7.7%7.1–8.3
Current asthma among adults8.4%7.6–9.3
Coronary heart disease among adults4.9%4.4–5.4
Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults4.0%3.5–4.4
Depression among adults17.6%15.9–19.4
Diagnosed diabetes among adults10.5%9.5–11.6
High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened39.3%36.9–41.6
Obesity among adults20.2%17.9–22.5
Stroke among adults2.7%2.5–3.0
All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years4.8%3.9–5.8
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
MeasureCrude prevalence95% CI
Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years4.8%4.2–5.4
Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure75.1%72.7–77.4
Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults75.7%73.5–77.8
Cholesterol screening among adults89.4%88.3–90.4
Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years62.5%59.1–65.5
Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults70.9%68.7–72.9
Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years78.4%73.7–82.3
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
MeasureCrude prevalence95% CI
Binge drinking among adults14.0%12.5–15.6
Current cigarette smoking among adults7.8%6.8–8.8
No leisure-time physical activity among adults18.5%16.7–20.6
Short sleep duration among adults32.6%29.8–35.2
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
MeasureCrude prevalence95% CI
Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults15.7%14.3–17.2
Frequent mental distress among adults13.1%11.9–14.4
Frequent physical distress among adults11.0%10.0–12.0
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
MeasureCrude prevalence95% CI
Cognitive disability among adults10.4%9.4–11.5
Any disability among adults24.3%22.3–26.4
Hearing disability among adults5.3%4.8–5.9
Independent living disability among adults5.8%5.2–6.4
Mobility disability among adults10.8%9.8–11.9
Self-care disability among adults2.7%2.5–3.0
Vision disability among adults3.7%3.3–4.0
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
MeasureCrude prevalence95% CI
Lack of social and emotional support among adults27.5%25.1–29.9
Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults9.9%8.8–11.1
Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults7.8%6.8–8.8
Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults8.5%7.6–9.5
Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults5.5%4.9–6.1
Loneliness among adults37.1%34.4–39.9
Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults3.8%3.3–4.3
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
MeasureValueUS median (p10–p90)CA median (p10–p90)
Poverty rate6.3%10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,36410.6% (4.1–24.9%) n=1,714
Uninsured 18–646.2%9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,2867.7% (1.7–17.9%) n=1,704
No HS diploma (25+)4.0%7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,5059.8% (1.4–30.9%) n=1,729
Bachelor's or higher (25+)59.2%23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,50531.3% (9.9–68.2%) n=1,729
Unemployment rate (16+)4.5%3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,2746.1% (0.8–12.0%) n=1,714
Households without a vehicle2.6%3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,3224.5% (0.0–12.2%) n=1,708
Broadband subscription97.3%89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,32293.4% (82.1–98.4%) n=1,708
Housing cost burden (≥30% income)43.5%23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,32238.6% (24.4–50.5%) n=1,708
Homeownership rate75.8%78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,32264.1% (31.9–86.4%) n=1,708
Crowded housing (>1 per room)2.5%1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,3224.8% (0.0–15.9%) n=1,708
Foreign-born population38.2%2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,55318.9% (3.0–40.4%) n=1,730
Single-parent households53.4%53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,08748.4% (35.1–72.3%) n=1,692
Population 65+20.6%19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,55317.0% (9.7–35.7%) n=1,730
Median age43.6 yr42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,29240.1 yr (31.8–57.0) n=1,712
Median household income$148,281$72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318$93,448 ($54,188–$159,562) n=1,584
Median home value$1,106,000$222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049$659,800 ($300,520–$1,493,340) n=1,593
Median gross rent$3,145$1,021 ($677–$1,912) n=25,670$1,912 ($1,113–$2,923) n=1,461
Life expectancyNCHS / RWJF USALEEP · model-based
MeasureValueUS median (p10–p90)CA median (p10–p90)
Life expectancy at birth84.2 yr ± 0.6978.9 yr (74.7–82.8) n=31,30880.5 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 0.69 years of 84.2, and it’s very unlikely to be off by more than twice that.

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