2018’s Best & Worst Cities for an Active Lifestyle
Photo via iStock.com/svetikd
With “lose weight and exercise more” being the No. 1 most commonly broken New Year’s resolution and 60 percent of gym memberships bought in January never used, which means a lot of money and opportunity wasted, the personal-finance website WalletHub took an in-depth look at 2018’s Best & Worst Cities for an Active Lifestyle.
To determine where Americans have the best chance of balancing a healthy diet with ample physical activity, WalletHub compared the 100 biggest U.S. cities across 34 key metrics. The dataset ranges from average monthly fitness-club fee to bike score to share of physically inactive adults.
Best Cities for an Active Lifestyle
Worst Cities for an Active Lifestyle
Jersey City, NJ
San Francisco, CA
San Diego, CA
New York, NY
North Las Vegas, NV
Best vs. Worst
- New York has the most sporting-goods stores (per square root of population), 0.4500, which is 16.6 times more than in North Las Vegas, Nevada, the city with the fewest at 0.0271.
- Scottsdale, Arizona has the most public golf courses (per square root of population), 0.0599, which is 37.4 times more than in Cleveland, the city with the fewest at 0.0016.
- Lincoln, Nebraska has the most fitness trainers and aerobics instructors per 100,000 residents, 185, which is 6 times more than in Bakersfield, California the city with the fewest at 31.
- San Francisco has the highest number of dance schools (per square root of population), 0.0510, which is 36.4 times higher than in Fresno, California, the city with the lowest at 0.0014.
- New York has the most playgrounds (per square root of population), 0.5737, which is 17.4 times more than in Hialeah, Florida, the city with the fewest at 0.0330.
Use the interactive tool to look at your city's data
To view the full report and your city’s rank, click here.