ZIP code
92637
in Laguna Woods, CaliforniaPopulation 17,289
63.72/ 100
Ranked #2,606 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 8.2%)
Ranked #323 of 1,719 California ZIPs (top 19%)
Ranked #110 of 371 Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim, CA ZIPs (top 30%)
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.
Binge drinking
5.1%
in the bottom 0.03% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS1stDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who report binge drinking — five or more drinks on one occasion for men, four or more for women.
Full methodology ›Utility shut-off threat
2.1%
in the bottom 0.03% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS1stDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults whose household was threatened with a utility shut-off in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›High cholesterol
53.5%
in the top 0.06% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with high cholesterol, among those who have ever been screened for it.
Full methodology ›Housing insecurity
3.6%
in the bottom 0.05% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS1stDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who experienced housing insecurity in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Coronary heart disease
13.2%
in the top 0.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have coronary heart disease or angina.
Full methodology ›Obesity
19.3%
in the bottom 0.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST5thUS1stDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with obesity, defined as a body-mass index of 30 or higher.
Full methodology ›Hearing disability
13.6%
in the top 1.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who are deaf or have serious difficulty hearing.
Full methodology ›Lack of transportation
3.7%
in the bottom 0.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS1stDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who lacked reliable transportation in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Short sleep
25.6%
in the bottom 0.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS1stDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who usually sleep less than seven hours in a 24-hour period.
Full methodology ›Stroke
6.4%
in the top 2.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS98thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have had a stroke.
Full methodology ›The read
Overall, Laguna Woods, California (ZIP 92637) lands in the top 8.2% healthiest ZIPs nationally (2,606th) and the top 19% of California (323rd).
A number of measures pull each way for this area: modeled utility shutoff rests in the bottom 0.03% nationally, and housing insecurity stands in the bottom 0.05% nationally. Modeled obesity lies in the bottom 0.8% nationally, and transportation lands in the bottom 0.8% nationally. Modeled short sleep sits in the bottom 0.6% nationally. Set against that, modeled high cholesterol is in the top 0.06% nationally, coronary heart disease settles in the top 0.7% nationally, and hearing disability resides in the top 1.2% nationally. Modeled stroke registers in the top 2.5% nationally, and high blood pressure rests in the top 2.2% nationally.
Set beside the nearby areas, walkability runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. For a healthier nearby comparison, ZIP 92618, just across the boundary, ranks better 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
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 86%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 78%
14%
Preventive Care
in the top 0.06%
13%
Risk Behavior
in the top 0.2%
11%
Mental Health
in the top 0.10%
8%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 92%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 93%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 9%
21%
Disability
healthier than 28%
7%
Lifting this score
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 80%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 87%
14%
Preventive Care
in the top 0.00%
13%
Risk Behavior
in the top 0.4%
11%
Mental Health
in the top 0.07%
8%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 82%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 87%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 2%
21%
Disability
healthier than 27%
7%
Lifting this score
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 76%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 98%
14%
Preventive Care
in the top 0.00%
13%
Risk Behavior
in the top 0.3%
11%
Mental Health
in the top 0.3%
8%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 77%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 83%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
in the bottom 0.3%
21%
Disability
healthier than 18%
7%
“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.
Clean environment, heavy chronic burden
Where the environment and chronic illness point in opposite directions
Environmental-hazard standing 77.7; chronic-disease standing 8.8 (bottom 10%) — 69 points apart, cleaner on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #1,134 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
92618
Californiashares a border
Score 71.72
Closest healthier
92651
Californiashares a border
Score 67.90
Similar health profile
54946
Wisconsin99% similar profile
Score 63.36
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 | 41.0% | 37.5–44.7 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 51.5% | 47.6–55.1 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 19.4% | 17.8–21.0 |
| Current asthma among adults | 8.6% | 7.6–9.6 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 13.2% | 11.9–14.6 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 8.8% | 7.6–10.1 |
| Depression among adults | 14.7% | 12.8–16.8 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 18.4% | 16.2–20.7 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 53.5% | 49.8–57.1 |
| Obesity among adults | 19.3% | 16.3–22.4 |
| Stroke among adults | 6.4% | 5.8–7.0 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 8.1% | 6.5–9.8 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 3.4% | 2.8–4.2 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 89.3% | 87.1–91.2 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 89.7% | 88.2–91.2 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 97.2% | 96.8–97.6 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 76.6% | 72.9–80.0 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 73.1% | 70.5–75.5 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 80.9% | 75.4–85.5 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 5.1% | 4.3–6.0 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 5.8% | 4.9–6.8 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 27.7% | 24.2–31.3 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 25.6% | 22.6–28.8 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 22.7% | 20.0–25.5 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 9.1% | 8.1–10.3 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 15.4% | 13.7–17.4 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 8.8% | 7.6–10.1 |
| Any disability among adults | 39.2% | 35.7–43.0 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 13.6% | 12.2–15.1 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 8.5% | 7.3–9.8 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 23.7% | 20.9–26.7 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 4.3% | 3.8–4.9 |
| Vision disability among adults | 5.8% | 5.2–6.6 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 20.7% | 18.1–23.5 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 6.7% | 5.7–8.0 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 5.9% | 4.9–7.1 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 3.6% | 3.1–4.3 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 3.7% | 3.2–4.2 |
| Loneliness among adults | 27.9% | 24.7–31.3 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 2.1% | 1.8–2.4 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | CA median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 14.2% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 10.6% (4.1–24.9%) n=1,714 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 7.9% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 7.7% (1.7–17.9%) n=1,704 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 4.2% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 9.8% (1.4–30.9%) n=1,729 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 50.9% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 31.3% (9.9–68.2%) n=1,729 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 7.3% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 6.1% (0.8–12.0%) n=1,714 |
| Households without a vehicle | 10.5% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 4.5% (0.0–12.2%) n=1,708 |
| Broadband subscription | 89.4% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 93.4% (82.1–98.4%) n=1,708 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 47.3% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 38.6% (24.4–50.5%) n=1,708 |
| Homeownership rate | 71.6% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 64.1% (31.9–86.4%) n=1,708 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 0.4% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 4.8% (0.0–15.9%) n=1,708 |
| Foreign-born population | 32.3% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 18.9% (3.0–40.4%) n=1,730 |
| Single-parent households | 86.0% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 48.4% (35.1–72.3%) n=1,692 |
| Population 65+ | 83.1% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 17.0% (9.7–35.7%) n=1,730 |
| Median age | 74.9 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 40.1 yr (31.8–57.0) n=1,712 |
| Median household income | $59,269 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $93,448 ($54,188–$159,562) n=1,584 |
| Median home value | $394,600 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $659,800 ($300,520–$1,493,340) n=1,593 |
| Median gross rent | $2,328 | $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 unavailable for this ZIP — fewer than 80% of the census tracts that make it up could be matched across the 2010→2020 tract-boundary revision, so no value is published rather than an unreliable one. See how coverage gaps are handled. | |||
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