With only 23 percent of Americans reporting that they are “very confident” they will have enough money for retirement, the personal-finance website WalletHub today released its report on 2019’s Best & Worst Places to Retire as well as accompanying videos.
To help Americans plan for a comfortable retirement without breaking the bank, WalletHub compared more than 180 U.S. cities across 46 key measures of affordability, quality of life, health care and availability of recreational activities. The data set ranges from cost of living to retired taxpayer-friendliness to share of the population aged 65 and older.
|Best Cities to Retire||Worst Cities to Retire|
|1||Orlando, FL||173||Providence, RI|
|2||Tampa, FL||174||Baltimore, MD|
|3||Scottsdale, AZ||175||Rancho Cucamonga, CA|
|4||Charleston, SC||176||Fresno, CA|
|5||Miami, FL||177||Newark, NJ|
|6||Denver, CO||178||Bakersfield, CA|
|7||Fort Lauderdale, FL||179||San Bernardino, CA|
|8||Cape Coral, FL||180||Warwick, RI|
|9||Minneapolis, MN||181||Bridgeport, CT|
|10||Cheyenne, WY||182||Stockton, CA|
Best vs. Worst
- Pearl City, Hawaii, has the highest share of the population aged 65 and older, 23.30 percent, which is 3.2 times higher than in Fontana, California, the city with the lowest at 7.20 percent.
- Laredo, Texas, has the lowest adjusted cost-of-living index for retirees, 76.28, which is 2.6 times lower than in San Francisco, the city with the highest at 195.49.
- Juneau, Alaska, has the highest share of workers aged 65 and older, 28.08 percent, which is 2.8 times higher than in Detroit, the city with the lowest at 10.11 percent.
- St. Louis has the most home health care facilities (per 100,000 residents), 49.54, which is 25.7 times more than in Fontana, California, the city with the fewest at 1.93.
To view the full report and your city’s rank, please visit: