Skip to content
CityLedger

Healthiest metros

Where the fewest adults report fair or poor health — age-adjusted, from CDC's population-health data.

Top 50 of 300 metros, ranked by our published formula.

Population health reflects income, education, climate, access to care, and lifestyle all at once, which makes a metro's overall health a useful summary of how those forces add up. This ranking uses CDC PLACES, which models the share of adults who rate their own health as 'fair' or 'poor' from the long-running BRFSS survey, age-adjusted so a retiree-heavy metro isn't penalized simply for being older. A lower share means more residents feel healthy.

Read the top of the list as places where self-reported health is strongest on average — not as a verdict on any individual or on local hospital quality. The honest caveat: self-rated health is subjective and tracks closely with income and education, so affluent, highly educated metros tend to rank well partly for reasons beyond health care. Pair it with the uninsured rate shown on every profile for a fuller view of access.

  1. 1
    Burlington, VT
    Fair/poor health: 12.1%
    77
    Livability
  2. 2
    Boulder, CO
    Fair/poor health: 12.6%
    83
    Livability
  3. 3
    Barnstable Town, MA
    Fair/poor health: 13.4%
    70
    Livability
  4. 4
    Fort Collins, CO
    Fair/poor health: 13.4%
    75
    Livability
  5. 5
    Ann Arbor, MI
    Fair/poor health: 13.5%
    71
    Livability
  6. 6
    Madison, WI
    Fair/poor health: 13.7%
    82
    Livability
  7. 7
    Manchester, NH
    Fair/poor health: 13.9%
    80
    Livability
  8. 8
    Rochester, MN
    Fair/poor health: 13.9%
    88
    Livability
  9. 9
    Seattle, WA
    Fair/poor health: 13.9%
    78
    Livability
  10. 10
    Provo, UT
    Fair/poor health: 14%
    74
    Livability
  11. 11
    Amherst Town, MA
    Fair/poor health: 14.1%
    62
    Livability
  12. 12
    Bremerton, WA
    Fair/poor health: 14.2%
    80
    Livability
  13. 13
    Albany, NY
    Fair/poor health: 14.3%
    68
    Livability
  14. 14
    Boston, MA
    Fair/poor health: 14.4%
    83
    Livability
  15. 15
    Denver, CO
    Fair/poor health: 14.5%
    83
    Livability
  16. 16
    Fargo, ND
    Fair/poor health: 14.5%
    72
    Livability
  17. 17
    Raleigh, NC
    Fair/poor health: 14.5%
    85
    Livability
  18. 18
    Minneapolis, MN
    Fair/poor health: 14.6%
    74
    Livability
  19. 19
    Portland, ME
    Fair/poor health: 14.7%
    76
    Livability
  20. 20
    Sioux Falls, SD
    Fair/poor health: 14.7%
    77
    Livability
  21. 21
    Lincoln, NE
    Fair/poor health: 14.8%
    63
    Livability
  22. 22
    Bridgeport, CT
    Fair/poor health: 14.9%
    79
    Livability
  23. 23
    Hilton Head Island, SC
    Fair/poor health: 14.9%
    72
    Livability
  24. 24
    Omaha, NE
    Fair/poor health: 15.1%
    69
    Livability
  25. 25
    Appleton, WI
    Fair/poor health: 15.2%
    71
    Livability
  26. 26
    Allentown, PA
    Fair/poor health: 15.3%
    49
    Livability
  27. 27
    Charlottesville, VA
    Fair/poor health: 15.3%
    84
    Livability
  28. 28
    Iowa City, IA
    Fair/poor health: 15.3%
    70
    Livability
  29. 29
    Washington, DC
    Fair/poor health: 15.3%
    81
    Livability
  30. 30
    Ogden, UT
    Fair/poor health: 15.4%
    72
    Livability
  31. 31
    Cedar Rapids, IA
    Fair/poor health: 15.6%
    61
    Livability
  32. 32
    Kingston, NY
    Fair/poor health: 15.6%
    57
    Livability
  33. 33
    Hartford, CT
    Fair/poor health: 15.7%
    69
    Livability
  34. 34
    Bloomington, IL
    Fair/poor health: 15.8%
    71
    Livability
  35. 35
    Lexington Park, MD
    Fair/poor health: 15.8%
    78
    Livability
  36. 36
    Olympia, WA
    Fair/poor health: 15.8%
    67
    Livability
  37. 37
    Rapid City, SD
    Fair/poor health: 15.8%
    65
    Livability
  38. 38
    Rochester, NY
    Fair/poor health: 15.8%
    59
    Livability
  39. 39
    Bellingham, WA
    Fair/poor health: 15.9%
    62
    Livability
  40. 40
    Bend, OR
    Fair/poor health: 15.9%
    73
    Livability
  41. 41
    Colorado Springs, CO
    Fair/poor health: 15.9%
    63
    Livability
  42. 42
    New Haven, CT
    Fair/poor health: 15.9%
    58
    Livability
  43. 43
    Traverse City, MI
    Fair/poor health: 15.9%
    71
    Livability
  44. 44
    Wildwood, FL
    Fair/poor health: 15.9%
    65
    Livability
  45. 45
    Durham, NC
    Fair/poor health: 16%
    70
    Livability
  46. 46
    San Jose, CA
    Fair/poor health: 16%
    82
    Livability
  47. 47
    Wilmington, NC
    Fair/poor health: 16%
    65
    Livability
  48. 48
    Asheville, NC
    Fair/poor health: 16.1%
    57
    Livability
  49. 49
    Boise City, ID
    Fair/poor health: 16.1%
    64
    Livability
  50. 50
    Coeur d'Alene, ID
    Fair/poor health: 16.1%
    61
    Livability

Common questions

What does “fair or poor health” measure?
It's the share of adults who rate their own overall health as fair or poor — rather than good, very good, or excellent — on the CDC's BRFSS survey, modeled to the local level in CDC PLACES. We use the age-adjusted figure so metros with older populations are compared fairly.
Does this rank hospitals or care quality?
No. It reflects how healthy residents report feeling, which is shaped by income, education, lifestyle, and environment as much as by medical care. A metro can score well on self-rated health yet still have access gaps — which is why each profile also shows the uninsured rate.
Why are wealthy metros near the top?
Self-rated health correlates strongly with income and education, so affluent, highly educated metros tend to report better health. It's a real pattern, but it means the ranking partly reflects socioeconomic status, not health care alone.