ZIP code
98199
in Seattle, WashingtonPopulation 22,468
69.99/ 100
Ranked #595 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 1.9%)
Ranked #23 of 581 Washington ZIPs (top 4.0%)
Ranked #23 of 166 Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue, WA ZIPs (top 13.9%)
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.
Median household income
$180,789
in the top 1.7% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST97thUS98thDefinition & source ›
The middle household income in this ZIP — half of households earn more, half earn less — in dollars per year.
Full methodology ›Obesity
21.8%
in the bottom 1.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST4thUS2ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with obesity, defined as a body-mass index of 30 or higher.
Full methodology ›Mobility disability
5.7%
in the bottom 1.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST5thUS1stDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with serious difficulty walking or climbing stairs.
Full methodology ›Diabetes
5.9%
in the bottom 1.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST4thUS1stDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been diagnosed with diabetes.
Full methodology ›Fair or poor health
9.1%
in the bottom 0.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS1stDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who rate their own general health as fair or poor.
Full methodology ›Independent-living disability
4.0%
in the bottom 0.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST2ndUS1stDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have difficulty doing errands alone, such as visiting a doctor’s office, because of a physical, mental, or emotional condition.
Full methodology ›Short sleep
27.2%
in the bottom 1.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST6thUS2ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who usually sleep less than seven hours in a 24-hour period.
Full methodology ›Energy-cost burden
0.84%
in the bottom 0.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST3rdUS1stDefinition & source ›
The modeled share of household income spent on home energy bills — electricity, gas, and heating fuels.
A modeled share of household income spent on home energy. Estimates that hit the model’s 100% ceiling are suppressed rather than published, because at that point the figure reflects the model’s limit rather than a measured burden.
Full methodology ›Coronary heart disease
3.7%
in the bottom 2.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST6thUS2ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have coronary heart disease or angina.
Full methodology ›Stroke
1.9%
in the bottom 2.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST5thUS2ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have had a stroke.
Full methodology ›The read
In overall standing, ZIP 98199, one of several in Seattle, Washington comes out in the top 1.9% healthiest ZIPs nationally (595th) and the top 4.0% of Washington (23rd).
The measures fall on both sides of the ledger for this area: household income registers in the top 1.7% nationally, modeled obesity stands in the bottom 1.9% nationally, and modeled mobility disability lands in the bottom 1.2% nationally. Modeled diabetes is in the bottom 1.5% nationally, fair or poor health resides in the bottom 0.3% nationally, and independent living disability rests in the bottom 0.3% nationally. Modeled short sleep lies in the bottom 1.8% nationally, and energy burden sits in the bottom 0.6% nationally. Modeled coronary heart disease settles in the bottom 2.5% nationally, and stroke registers in the bottom 2.0% nationally.
Relative to the ZIPs around it, expected annual loss runs far lower than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. In plain terms, energy burden is the share of household income that goes to home energy bills. The nearest healthier ZIP overall is ZIP 98107, 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 Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue, WA 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 97%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 97%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 66%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 99%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 71%
8%
Disability
in the top 0.5%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 71%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 38%
14%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 32%
5%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 92%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 91%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 88%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 92%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 87%
8%
Disability
healthier than 96%
7%
About typical
Healthcare Access
healthier than 57%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 39%
14%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 4%
5%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 83%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 82%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 90%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 90%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 85%
8%
Disability
healthier than 91%
7%
About typical
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 42%
14%
Holding it back
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 4%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 38%
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
2 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.
Heavy environment, light chronic burden
Where the environment and chronic illness point in opposite directions
Environmental-hazard standing 38.3; chronic-disease standing 97.3 (top 10%) — 59 points apart, heavier on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #15,311 of the 18,187 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by the gap from cleanest environment to heaviest chronic burden, highest first.
Highest-risk tenth
Air toxics and the years between the two ends of the risk scale
Modeled air-toxics cancer risk is 38.7 cases per million — among the tenth of compared ZIP codes with the most. Estimated life expectancy is 83.4 ± 1.9 years.
Ranked #1,663 of the 4,173 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by modeled air-toxics risk, highest first.
Nearby & similar ZIPs
Editorially selected — see how this ZIP compares to nearby and similar places.
Nearby
98107
Washingtonshares a border
Score 72.08
Closest healthier
98103
Washingtonabout 0.9 mi away
Score 70.51
Similar health profile
66006
Kansas99% similar profile
Score 61.74
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 | 20.0% | 18.7–21.3 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 25.3% | 23.7–26.9 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 8.1% | 7.6–8.8 |
| Current asthma among adults | 9.8% | 9.0–10.6 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 3.7% | 3.3–4.0 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 2.8% | 2.5–3.2 |
| Depression among adults | 24.7% | 23.0–26.5 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 5.9% | 5.3–6.5 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 33.9% | 32.1–35.8 |
| Obesity among adults | 21.8% | 19.7–24.1 |
| Stroke among adults | 1.9% | 1.8–2.1 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 3.6% | 3.0–4.2 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 4.3% | 3.7–4.9 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 68.1% | 65.9–70.3 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 71.4% | 69.5–73.4 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 88.6% | 87.5–89.7 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 69.8% | 67.7–71.9 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 76.7% | 75.0–78.2 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 80.6% | 77.6–83.2 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 18.9% | 17.4–20.5 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 5.2% | 4.5–6.1 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 9.8% | 8.7–11.0 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 27.2% | 25.2–29.3 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 9.1% | 8.2–10.1 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 13.3% | 12.2–14.4 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 8.4% | 7.6–9.2 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 8.9% | 8.0–9.8 |
| Any disability among adults | 17.4% | 15.9–18.8 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 4.3% | 3.9–4.7 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 4.0% | 3.6–4.4 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 5.7% | 5.1–6.4 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 1.8% | 1.6–2.0 |
| Vision disability among adults | 2.3% | 2.1–2.5 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | WA median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 5.3% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 9.6% (3.5–22.3%) n=583 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 4.4% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 8.2% (1.8–22.7%) n=582 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 0.7% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 7.0% (1.5–16.5%) n=588 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 77.8% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 27.4% (12.3–59.7%) n=588 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 2.8% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.5% (0.0–9.7%) n=584 |
| Households without a vehicle | 5.5% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 3.7% (0.0–10.2%) n=580 |
| Broadband subscription | 96.7% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 92.7% (81.1–97.4%) n=580 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 25.9% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 28.9% (14.6–40.6%) n=580 |
| Homeownership rate | 63.2% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 75.2% (48.2–91.7%) n=580 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 1.0% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 2.6% (0.0–7.9%) n=580 |
| Foreign-born population | 13.7% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 6.7% (0.3–27.6%) n=588 |
| Single-parent households | 47.3% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 54.3% (40.5–76.0%) n=574 |
| Population 65+ | 15.3% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 18.9% (10.3–36.9%) n=588 |
| Median age | 39.5 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 41.0 yr (32.9–58.8) n=584 |
| Median household income | $180,789 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $84,646 ($56,217–$132,145) n=547 |
| Median home value | $1,198,700 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $452,750 ($241,540–$826,380) n=542 |
| Median gross rent | $2,470 | $1,021 ($677–$1,912) n=25,670 | $1,416 ($840–$2,197) n=476 |
Life expectancyNCHS / RWJF USALEEP · model-based
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | WA median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Life expectancy at birth | 83.3 yr ± 0.95 | 78.9 yr (74.7–82.8) n=31,308 | 80.2 yr (77.3–83.1) n=584 |
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 0.95 years of 83.3, 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