ZIP code
92653
in Laguna Hills, CaliforniaPopulation 29,624
65.69/ 100
Ranked #1,745 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 5.5%)
Ranked #244 of 1,719 California ZIPs (top 14.2%)
Ranked #80 of 371 Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim, CA ZIPs (top 22%)
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.
Dental provider access
2.1 per 1,000 residents
in the top 1.1% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST97thUS99thDefinition & 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 ›Physician access
5.1 per 1,000 residents
in the top 1.2% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST97thUS99thDefinition & 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 ›Outpatient-care access
1.1 per 1,000 residents
in the top 1.5% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST98thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The number of outpatient clinics 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 ›Obesity
23.4%
in the bottom 3.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST18thUS3rdDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with obesity, defined as a body-mass index of 30 or higher.
Full methodology ›Mental-health provider access
0.2 per 1,000 residents
in the top 4.3% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST95thUS96thDefinition & source ›
The number of mental-health clinics 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 ›Loud transportation noise
2.6%
in the top 5.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST70thUS95thDefinition & 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 ›Median household income
$133,194
in the top 6.4% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST80thUS94thDefinition & source ›
The middle household income in this ZIP — half of households earn more, half earn less — in dollars per year.
Full methodology ›Recreation access
1.3 per 1,000 residents
in the top 5.3% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST91stUS95thDefinition & 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 ›Pharmacy access
0.43 per 1,000 residents
in the top 7.0% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST95thUS93rdDefinition & source ›
The number of pharmacies 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 ›The read
Laguna Hills, California (ZIP 92653), by its composite score, sits in the top 5.5% healthiest ZIPs nationally (1,745th) and the top 14.2% of California (244th).
The measures land in both directions, and neither dominates: dental providers registers in the top 1.1% nationally, and physicians settles in the top 1.2% nationally. Outpatient sits in the top 1.5% nationally, and modeled obesity lies in the bottom 3.4% nationally. Mental-health providers rests in the top 4.3% nationally, household income resides in the top 6.4% nationally, and recreation is in the top 5.3% nationally. Distance to an emergency room lands at the national minimum, shared with about 11% of ZIPs. Pulling the other way, modeled tree cover stands at the national minimum, and loud transportation noise registers in the top 5.0% nationally.
Next to the surrounding area, park land runs far lower than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. For anyone unfamiliar, 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. For a healthier comparison close by, see ZIP 92618, 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 89%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 95%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 68%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 90%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 81%
8%
Disability
healthier than 84%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 87%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 94%
5%
About typical
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 52%
14%
Nothing measured is holding this score back.
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 68%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 92%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 74%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 84%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 81%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 79%
8%
Disability
healthier than 80%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 71%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 90%
5%
Nothing measured is holding this score back.
Lifting this score
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 93%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 90%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 87%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 79%
11%
Disability
healthier than 72%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 89%
5%
About typical
Mental Health
healthier than 59%
8%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 56%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 40%
21%
“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.
Above what income predicts
The ZIP codes that outlive their incomes
Estimated life expectancy is 82.6 ± 1.1 years. A median household income of $133,194 predicts 81.2 years — 1.4 years above.
Ranked #1,332 of the 5,842 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by years above what income predicts, 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
92656
Californiashares a border
Score 67.18
Similar health profile
91362
California100% similar profile
Score 66.33
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 | 21.3% | 19.2–23.6 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 30.0% | 27.2–32.7 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 8.7% | 7.9–9.5 |
| Current asthma among adults | 9.3% | 8.3–10.4 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 5.7% | 5.1–6.3 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 4.6% | 4.1–5.2 |
| Depression among adults | 19.9% | 17.5–22.4 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 10.5% | 9.2–11.8 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 37.5% | 34.4–40.6 |
| Obesity among adults | 23.4% | 20.0–26.9 |
| Stroke among adults | 2.9% | 2.7–3.2 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 6.5% | 5.2–7.9 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 6.3% | 5.4–7.3 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 75.3% | 72.3–78.1 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 75.5% | 72.7–78.2 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 89.3% | 88.0–90.5 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 64.6% | 60.6–68.4 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 69.8% | 67.1–72.4 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 80.1% | 74.7–84.9 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 15.5% | 13.3–17.8 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 8.0% | 6.8–9.4 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 20.3% | 17.7–23.0 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 33.0% | 29.4–36.6 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 17.7% | 15.7–19.8 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 15.2% | 13.6–16.9 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 11.8% | 10.5–13.2 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 11.7% | 10.4–13.0 |
| Any disability among adults | 26.3% | 23.5–29.1 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 5.9% | 5.2–6.5 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 6.5% | 5.8–7.3 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 12.0% | 10.6–13.5 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 3.0% | 2.7–3.3 |
| Vision disability among adults | 4.0% | 3.7–4.4 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 24.5% | 21.9–27.5 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 10.7% | 9.2–12.3 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 8.8% | 7.5–10.1 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 9.4% | 8.1–10.8 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 6.1% | 5.4–6.9 |
| Loneliness among adults | 32.6% | 29.1–36.2 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 4.9% | 4.2–5.6 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | CA median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 8.0% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 10.6% (4.1–24.9%) n=1,714 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 5.2% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 7.7% (1.7–17.9%) n=1,704 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 5.4% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 9.8% (1.4–30.9%) n=1,729 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 54.8% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 31.3% (9.9–68.2%) n=1,729 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 6.0% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 6.1% (0.8–12.0%) n=1,714 |
| Households without a vehicle | 3.1% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 4.5% (0.0–12.2%) n=1,708 |
| Broadband subscription | 95.5% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 93.4% (82.1–98.4%) n=1,708 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 40.3% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 38.6% (24.4–50.5%) n=1,708 |
| Homeownership rate | 69.5% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 64.1% (31.9–86.4%) n=1,708 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 3.1% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 4.8% (0.0–15.9%) n=1,708 |
| Foreign-born population | 26.2% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 18.9% (3.0–40.4%) n=1,730 |
| Single-parent households | 50.5% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 48.4% (35.1–72.3%) n=1,692 |
| Population 65+ | 21.2% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 17.0% (9.7–35.7%) n=1,730 |
| Median age | 41.7 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 40.1 yr (31.8–57.0) n=1,712 |
| Median household income | $133,194 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $93,448 ($54,188–$159,562) n=1,584 |
| Median home value | $1,063,300 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $659,800 ($300,520–$1,493,340) n=1,593 |
| Median gross rent | $2,745 | $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 | 82.6 yr ± 0.54 | 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 0.54 years of 82.6, 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