ZIP code
93040
in Piru, CaliforniaPopulation 1,799
57.18/ 100
Ranked #7,093 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 22%)
Ranked #664 of 1,719 California ZIPs (top 39%)
Ranked #19 of 27 Oxnard-Thousand Oaks-Ventura, CA ZIPs (bottom 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.
Park land
88%
in the top 0.4% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The share of this ZIP’s land area that is public parkland.
Full methodology ›Fatal road crashes
61.1 per 100,000 residents per year
in the top 2.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST96thUS98thDefinition & source ›
The annual rate of fatal road crashes per 100,000 residents, pooled over a ten-year window.
A rate per resident population. Where a ZIP has too few residents for the rate to be reliable — about 30% of US ZIPs — no value is published rather than an unstable one; those ZIPs are absent from this comparison, not counted as crash-free.
Full methodology ›Walkability
1.1 intersections/sq mi
in the bottom 3.1% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST3rdUS3rdDefinition & source ›
The number of street intersections per square mile — a standard street-connectivity measure; denser networks correlate with more walkable neighborhoods.
Full methodology ›Crowded housing
12.0%
in the top 3.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST82ndUS97thDefinition & source ›
The share of occupied homes with more than one person per room, the Census definition of crowded housing.
Full methodology ›Loud transportation noise
2.8%
in the top 4.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST74thUS96thDefinition & 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 ›Uninsured (under 65)
18.5%
in the top 5.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST89thUS94thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults aged 18–64 with no current health-insurance coverage.
Full methodology ›High blood pressure
26.9%
in the bottom 4.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST12thUS5thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have high blood pressure.
Full methodology ›Colon-cancer screening
56.9%
in the bottom 7.2% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST28thUS7thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults aged 45–75 who are up to date on colorectal-cancer screening.
Full methodology ›Housing insecurity
20.7%
in the top 8.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST82ndUS92ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who experienced housing insecurity in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Unemployment rate
10.5%
in the top 8.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST86thUS91stDefinition & source ›
The share of the civilian labor force that is unemployed.
Full methodology ›The read
By the composite measure, Piru, California (ZIP 93040) sits in the top 22% healthiest ZIPs nationally (7,093rd) and the top 39% of California (664th).
Where the data leans one way, another reading answers it: park land settles in the top 0.4% nationally, and modeled high blood pressure stands in the bottom 4.6% nationally. Households without a vehicle is at the national minimum, shared with about 16% of ZIPs. On the other hand, fatal road crashes rests in the top 2.1% nationally, and walkability sits in the bottom 3.1% nationally. Crowded housing registers in the top 3.4% nationally, and modeled loud transportation noise lands in the top 4.3% nationally. Modeled uninsured resides in the top 5.9% nationally, and colon screening lies in the bottom 7.2% nationally. Modeled housing insecurity settles in the top 8.1% nationally.
Compared with the ZIPs that surround it, park land runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. In plain language, 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. ZIP 91384, just across the boundary, 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 Oxnard-Thousand Oaks-Ventura, 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 95%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 73%
16%
Mental Health
healthier than 74%
8%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 70%
5%
About typical
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 58%
14%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 55%
11%
Disability
healthier than 54%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 54%
5%
Holding it back
Preventive Care
healthier than 6%
13%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 87%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 67%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 77%
14%
Mental Health
healthier than 70%
8%
About typical
Disability
healthier than 52%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 51%
5%
Holding it back
Preventive Care
healthier than 20%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 31%
11%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 34%
5%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 96%
21%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 67%
14%
Mental Health
healthier than 71%
8%
About typical
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 58%
5%
Holding it back
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 33%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 17%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 17%
11%
Disability
healthier than 33%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 8%
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 ›
Nearby & similar ZIPs
Editorially selected — see how this ZIP compares to nearby and similar places.
Nearby
91384
Californiashares a border
Score 58.34
Closest healthier
93023
Californiashares a border
Score 57.45
Similar health profile
92154
California97% similar profile
Score 55.59
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 | 16.2% | 14.2–18.4 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 26.9% | 23.8–30.1 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 4.4% | 4.0–4.9 |
| Current asthma among adults | 8.9% | 7.8–10.1 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 4.7% | 4.1–5.3 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 3.7% | 3.1–4.4 |
| Depression among adults | 19.0% | 16.2–21.9 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 12.0% | 10.3–13.8 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 33.1% | 29.6–36.7 |
| Obesity among adults | 28.8% | 23.7–34.4 |
| Stroke among adults | 2.6% | 2.3–3.0 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 10.3% | 8.2–12.6 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 18.5% | 13.9–23.8 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 65.6% | 61.7–69.1 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 69.5% | 65.5–73.6 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 83.9% | 81.0–86.5 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 56.9% | 52.2–61.6 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 57.0% | 53.5–60.5 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 75.0% | 68.2–81.3 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 17.0% | 14.2–20.1 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 10.1% | 8.2–12.2 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 28.5% | 24.0–33.4 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 36.5% | 31.6–41.6 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 26.4% | 22.4–30.8 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 17.0% | 14.9–19.2 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 14.1% | 12.2–16.2 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 16.4% | 13.8–19.3 |
| Any disability among adults | 32.3% | 27.8–37.1 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 5.4% | 4.7–6.1 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 7.9% | 6.7–9.3 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 13.7% | 11.6–16.1 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 4.1% | 3.5–4.8 |
| Vision disability among adults | 6.7% | 5.7–7.9 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 27.9% | 23.7–32.2 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 22.8% | 18.3–27.6 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 16.7% | 13.3–20.3 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 20.7% | 17.2–24.3 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 11.2% | 9.2–13.1 |
| Loneliness among adults | 36.1% | 31.3–41.1 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 8.7% | 7.2–10.2 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | CA median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 15.0% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 10.6% (4.1–24.9%) n=1,714 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 13.0% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 7.7% (1.7–17.9%) n=1,704 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 29.2% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 9.8% (1.4–30.9%) n=1,729 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 9.9% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 31.3% (9.9–68.2%) n=1,729 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 10.5% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 6.1% (0.8–12.0%) n=1,714 |
| Households without a vehicle | 0.0% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 4.5% (0.0–12.2%) n=1,708 |
| Broadband subscription | 93.1% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 93.4% (82.1–98.4%) n=1,708 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 32.0% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 38.6% (24.4–50.5%) n=1,708 |
| Homeownership rate | 63.9% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 64.1% (31.9–86.4%) n=1,708 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 12.0% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 4.8% (0.0–15.9%) n=1,708 |
| Foreign-born population | 31.1% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 18.9% (3.0–40.4%) n=1,730 |
| Single-parent households | 50.8% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 48.4% (35.1–72.3%) n=1,692 |
| Population 65+ | 17.7% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 17.0% (9.7–35.7%) n=1,730 |
| Median age | 31.7 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 40.1 yr (31.8–57.0) n=1,712 |
| Median household income | $94,556 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $93,448 ($54,188–$159,562) n=1,584 |
| Median home value | $624,300 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $659,800 ($300,520–$1,493,340) n=1,593 |
| Median gross rent | $1,690 | $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 | 83.2 yr ± 2.73 | 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 2.73 years of 83.2, 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