WalletHub analyzed the 150 most populated cities in the United States to determine where retirees were better off spending the winter of their lives.
Cities with a lower score would do well to attract more older citizens, according to Maurice MacDonald, professor of personal financial planning at Kansas State University and a commenter on WalletHub's expert panel. "Communities that can attract new people at any age or with different backgrounds are inherently more vibrant and interesting. Today's retirees maintain youthful attitudes and many have more financial resources and time to participate in community activities as spenders and donors than the average community resident."
He suggested cities develop moderate-income housing and better medical services to meet those older citizens' demands, as well as invest in the cultural and outdoor activities that are unique to that city.
Recommended For You
Cities were scored in four equally weighted categories: Affordability, activities, quality of life and health care. The scores were then ranked from 1 to 150, with 1 being the best.
To determine the affordability score, WalletHub considered a city's adjusted cost of living, and gave a half weight to the annual cost of in-home services and the state's ranking in WalletHub's Taxpayer report (that data is only available at a state level).
Jan Cullinane, author of "The Single Woman's Guide to Retirement" and another WalletHub panelist, pointed to taxes as a particularly important consideration for retirees considering a move.
"Few people move to a new state just to reduce the tax bite, but if a decision is made to move for any or all of the other personal reasons (climate, proximity to relatives, overall cost of living, good medical care, infrastructure, etc.)," she said, retirees should also "consider the tax consequences of [their] move."
The activities score was based on the concentration of recreation and senior centers, fishing facilities and public golf courses; volunteer opportunities for adults; and WalletHub's Recreation report ranking. WalletHub also considered hiking areas at a lower weighting.
Quality of life was measured by the percentage of the population over 65; the labor market's friendliness to elder workers; and violent and property crime rates. The city's rank in WalletHub's Mild Weather report was double-weighted, and air and water quality were given half weight.
The health care score was based on the concentration of family and general physicians, dentists (at half weight), nurses, health care facilities and home care facilities.
Public hospital rankings and the death rate for people 65 and older, data for which was only available at the state level, were also considered.
Data for the report was drawn from WalletHub's own research as well as the U.S. Census Bureau, the FBI, the Council for Community and Economic Research, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the American Lung Association's "State of the Air" report, the Environmental Working Group, the Trust For Public Land, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, Charity Navigator, Healthways.com, Yelp.com and Golf.com.
Here are the 15 worst cities for retirement, according to WalletHub:
15. Fontana, California
Affordability: 97
Activities: 148
Quality of Life: 69
Health Care: 135
14. Buffalo, New York
Affordability: 105
Activities: 70
Quality of Life: 141
Health Care: 127
13. Washington, D.C.
Affordability: 126
Activities: 30
Quality of Life: 142
Health Care: 123
12. San Bernardino, California
Affordability: 97
Activities: 145
Quality of Life: 94
Health Care: 119
11. Philadelphia
Affordability: 139
Activities: 101
Quality of Life: 103
Health Care: 105
10. Detroit
Affordability: 69
Activities: 105
Quality of Life: 137
Health Care: 148
11. Worcester, Massachusetts
Affordability: 118
Activities: 108
Quality of Life: 116
Health Care: 132
8. Boston
Affordability: 149
Activities: 86
Quality of Life: 131
Health Care: 99
7. Chicago
Affordability: 143
Activities: 80
Quality of Life: 140
Health Care: 143
6. Yonkers, New York
Affordability: 147
Activities: 138
Quality of Life: 85
Health Care: 138
5. New York City
Affordability: 148
Activities: 130
Quality of Life: 60
Health Care: 147
4. Aurora, Illinois
Affordability: 143
Activities: 131
Quality of Life: 87
Health Care: 145
3. Providence, Rhode Island
Affordability: 150
Activities: 85
Quality of Life: 135
Health Care: 146
2. Jersey City, New Jersey
Affordability: 141
Activities: 140
Quality of Life: 108
Health Care: 149
1. Newark, New Jersey
Affordability: 138
Activities: 117
Quality of Life: 150
Health Care: 150
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
