Rehabs Market Research
15 KPIs for Every City & State Delivered Monthly

Explain & Improve rehabs.com's Search Traffic By Comparing To All 11,811 Rehabs In USA

Who Is This For
Just a Few Benefits

Rehabs Managers
Founders, Partners, Business Development & Marketing Directors
Rehabs Personnel
Business Analysts, Digital Marketing Experts, SEO Experts, etc.
Other Parties
Journalists, Salesmen, Investors, Service Providers, etc.

Get a snapshot of your online presence
Compare with competitors & track month-to-month movements
Get a full picture of your competition
National or regional (state/county) & local (city/neighborhood)
Enter new markets
Or merge with/acquire another business

Real-World Rehabs Report, December 2025 (1% Sample of All Data)

Google search results collected from every zip-code in America. Reported at neighborhood, city, county, state, and national levels.

National Overview
City Overview
California
Brooklyn
National
Competitors
Local
Competitors
RAW Rankings

National Overview

State	Competition			Business Intelligence Metrics			RAW Data (Google Search Results across all ZIPs)
State	Websites	Competitors	Rehabs Rank	Visibility	Reach	Average Position	Cities	ZIPs	Pages	Rankings	Top 1	Top 3	Top 10
USA	142,613	11,811	1	50.3%	162,529,878	13.7	25,437	30,701	18,442	33,555	5,868	10,904	28,252
California	22,159	3,411	1	52.6%	20,605,954	9.3	1,126	1,700	1,148	1,827	283	501	1,554
Texas	27,244	4,049	1	43.9%	12,249,918	12.3	1,260	1,816	1,333	1,937	340	604	1,721
New York	24,498	3,603	1	52.4%	10,282,087	15.8	1,360	1,624	1,409	1,779	300	560	1,468
Florida	9,585	1,733	1	49.0%	10,087,061	7.9	432	961	460	1,010	94	184	895
Pennsylvania	24,808	3,556	1	52.5%	6,712,628	15.3	1,450	1,626	1,521	1,750	360	627	1,524
Illinois	23,434	3,684	1	49.6%	6,361,990	14.6	1,158	1,293	1,266	1,440	223	454	1,203
Georgia	12,878	2,195	1	54.0%	5,555,912	12.5	537	688	575	744	110	217	671
Michigan	17,935	2,770	1	53.8%	5,352,976	14.6	769	912	822	993	165	308	845
Ohio	18,820	3,186	1	45.8%	5,327,349	14.8	892	1,104	980	1,227	175	328	1,009
North Carolina	14,635	2,363	1	49.4%	5,013,492	13.6	637	756	674	815	123	244	698
Virginia	15,701	2,389	1	53.2%	4,472,244	13.2	673	841	697	905	179	302	740
New Jersey	10,245	1,888	1	48.3%	4,293,688	11.4	514	569	552	621	56	116	526
Massachusetts	9,219	1,631	1	51.2%	3,499,604	11.1	442	514	467	569	70	147	494
Tennessee	11,848	2,003	1	51.3%	3,410,679	11.7	482	590	523	648	118	234	551
Washington	10,403	1,660	1	46.4%	3,380,456	12.4	422	558	430	595	105	192	504
Wisconsin	15,496	2,287	1	53.4%	3,087,492	11.7	661	736	723	805	159	286	683
Indiana	14,940	2,522	1	46.4%	3,081,178	14.7	602	713	688	817	138	257	669
Missouri	19,452	3,031	1	50.2%	3,054,955	13.2	829	959	906	1,061	203	394	914
Arizona	6,735	1,110	2	43.7%	3,035,971	9.9	236	385	250	406	75	137	378
Maryland	9,126	1,598	1	50.4%	3,026,248	13.5	363	434	386	477	87	156	408
Minnesota	17,707	2,492	1	53.6%	2,964,258	11.1	743	843	792	910	220	384	797
South Carolina	9,260	1,616	1	52.2%	2,589,269	11.1	327	401	354	442	78	148	405
Kentucky	15,799	2,462	1	54.9%	2,440,180	14.4	643	703	712	799	169	313	686
Alabama	12,111	2,014	1	50.1%	2,439,388	12.9	491	606	519	659	113	189	559
Louisiana	10,398	1,644	1	51.5%	2,399,393	14.1	399	478	411	513	92	174	431
Colorado	10,558	1,659	2	42.9%	2,373,335	11.2	361	494	378	522	97	171	409
Oklahoma	14,067	2,140	1	60.0%	2,350,282	12.5	519	608	549	663	149	286	578
Oregon	9,777	1,618	1	56.1%	2,289,215	11.4	338	397	363	435	84	164	372
Connecticut	5,573	1,134	1	49.0%	1,754,838	10.3	226	271	256	304	33	73	246
Arkansas	14,146	2,260	1	57.7%	1,724,484	10.6	531	565	578	620	133	266	547
Mississippi	9,978	1,743	1	55.7%	1,666,196	12.3	366	400	382	436	93	168	358
Utah	7,133	1,202	1	53.5%	1,627,104	12.0	238	274	254	300	47	95	250
Iowa	19,685	3,005	1	47.0%	1,473,533	21.3	778	820	848	912	155	296	715
Kansas	15,094	2,486	1	46.9%	1,363,202	16.9	564	640	599	712	93	207	553
Nevada	3,360	511	2	45.3%	1,323,740	8.6	88	164	93	170	34	58	158
New Mexico	8,836	1,268	1	58.8%	1,229,609	8.6	317	351	341	378	131	184	340
West Virginia	16,141	2,453	1	58.6%	1,070,909	21.4	589	609	609	676	150	266	555
Idaho	7,648	1,212	1	49.1%	827,907	16.4	231	253	243	282	46	103	227
Hawaii	1,659	192	1	55.8%	793,336	12.6	78	89	67	91	22	29	75
Maine	10,364	1,640	1	55.0%	733,107	14.4	398	402	425	470	63	140	373
New Hampshire	6,378	1,276	1	51.8%	696,271	12.6	228	238	262	282	37	78	230
Nebraska	14,144	2,342	2	34.4%	656,001	17.6	478	535	514	588	92	193	443
Montana	10,646	1,513	1	56.7%	591,313	21.7	312	325	318	355	74	135	259
Rhode Island	2,182	488	1	51.0%	539,389	10.2	62	75	69	83	3	14	72
Delaware	1,842	403	1	51.9%	492,392	8.3	51	65	61	84	10	18	73
Alaska	5,303	640	1	61.5%	454,199	13.3	207	224	183	234	88	122	178
North Dakota	11,060	1,527	1	53.8%	404,397	22.3	323	337	326	370	68	142	276
South Dakota	10,839	1,664	1	45.7%	395,049	20.4	321	332	342	371	57	107	279
Wyoming	5,831	952	1	55.9%	325,637	20.2	149	156	148	169	24	59	125
Vermont	6,281	1,114	1	48.6%	303,431	15.0	235	239	249	271	50	73	200

City Overview

City	State	Competition	Business Intelligence Metrics	RAW Data (Google Search Results across all ZIPs)
Brooklyn	New York	115	46	4	63.4%	1,649,982	4.7	37	1	37	0	4	37
Los Angeles	California	110	47	4	54.4%	1,336,629	5.6	62	1	62	0	9	62
Miami	Florida	129	45	5	57.6%	1,083,119	5.4	55	1	55	0	12	55
Chicago	Illinois	118	44	6	39.7%	1,073,057	7.0	56	1	56	0	0	56
Bronx	New York	113	37	5	56.1%	808,334	5.5	25	1	25	0	4	25
Philadelphia	Pennsylvania	116	40	6	46.1%	727,060	6.3	47	1	47	0	3	47
New York City	New York	124	45	6	42.8%	693,731	6.7	47	1	47	0	0	47
Portland	Oregon	112	39	4	64.9%	597,674	4.7	33	1	33	0	4	33
Detroit	Michigan	113	17	1	90.1%	577,269	2.3	25	1	25	14	14	25
Charlotte	North Carolina	104	39	4	63.4%	574,712	4.6	24	1	24	0	3	24
Dallas	Texas	115	46	6	40.3%	560,869	7.0	48	1	48	0	0	48
Las Vegas	Nevada	116	42	7	34.6%	534,223	7.6	43	1	43	0	0	42
Minneapolis	Minnesota	123	30	6	42.2%	459,582	6.7	51	1	51	0	0	51
Milwaukee	Wisconsin	133	30	4	55.1%	447,406	5.5	29	1	29	0	5	29
Saint Paul	Minnesota	116	32	5	52.7%	421,633	5.6	30	1	30	0	4	30
Tampa	Florida	114	44	5	52.8%	418,448	5.7	27	1	27	0	3	27
Houston	Texas	116	52	9	13.1%	417,642	9.8	96	1	96	0	0	96
Louisville	Kentucky	108	30	6	52.4%	398,460	5.8	32	1	32	0	2	32
Fort Worth	Texas	109	44	4	41.1%	375,169	6.8	32	1	32	0	0	32
El Paso	Texas	121	39	6	46.9%	370,332	6.3	24	1	24	0	0	24
Oklahoma City	Oklahoma	116	37	5	54.1%	369,226	5.6	43	1	43	0	6	43
Fort Lauderdale	Florida	121	47	7	44.2%	367,221	6.6	27	1	27	0	0	27
Atlanta	Georgia	116	31	7	37.0%	365,709	7.2	39	1	39	0	0	39
Washington DC	District of Columbia	115	41	5	50.7%	346,636	6.3	28	1	28	0	1	28
Long Beach	California	123	44	2	71.1%	340,317	4.0	12	1	12	0	4	12
Mesa	Arizona	110	44	4	63.0%	336,881	4.5	13	1	13	0	2	13
Hollywood	Florida	129	45	2	71.2%	333,592	3.9	9	1	9	1	1	9
Buffalo	New York	116	27	6	58.3%	327,918	5.5	28	1	28	0	5	28
Baltimore	Maryland	115	31	5	51.3%	323,842	5.9	22	1	22	0	1	22
San Antonio	Texas	110	52	9	17.3%	307,643	9.1	59	1	59	0	0	59
Aurora	Colorado	122	32	4	69.7%	303,512	4.4	11	1	11	1	2	11
Saint Louis	Missouri	121	42	8	32.5%	297,760	7.7	45	1	45	0	0	45
Cincinnati	Ohio	116	40	7	36.9%	296,938	7.4	45	1	45	0	0	45
Pompano Beach	Florida	124	48	3	77.2%	286,100	3.4	10	1	10	2	2	10
Staten Island	New York	114	25	4	60.0%	284,461	5.0	12	1	12	0	0	12
Oakland	California	120	34	5	64.5%	265,475	4.6	14	1	14	0	2	14
Spring	Texas	113	48	3	67.3%	256,225	4.5	8	1	8	0	1	8
Corona	California	161	53	1	98.6%	253,782	1.2	5	1	5	4	5	5
Saint Petersburg	Florida	112	20	3	70.0%	249,547	4.0	16	1	16	0	0	16
West Palm Beach	Florida	100	43	4	65.1%	241,360	4.3	12	1	12	0	3	12
Henderson	Nevada	122	42	2	75.5%	228,551	3.4	8	1	8	1	4	8
Tulsa	Oklahoma	125	37	5	53.0%	223,537	5.7	28	1	28	0	3	28
Honolulu	Hawaii	126	42	4	53.7%	223,300	5.7	11	1	11	0	0	11
Fresno	California	125	33	8	37.0%	222,815	7.5	18	1	18	0	0	18
Cleveland	Ohio	123	40	7	29.5%	221,368	7.9	29	1	29	0	0	29
Anaheim	California	114	43	3	60.0%	221,176	5.0	7	2	14	0	0	14
Bakersfield	California	112	30	8	39.3%	219,607	7.2	11	1	11	0	0	11
Lakeland	Florida	112	27	2	83.7%	215,794	3.0	9	1	9	3	3	9
Riverside	California	110	39	4	57.3%	212,129	5.3	7	1	7	0	0	7
Phoenix	Arizona	115	52	11	14.4%	209,450	9.5	42	1	42	0	0	42
Wichita	Kansas	117	34	5	50.0%	209,069	5.9	26	1	26	0	1	26
Alexandria	Virginia	121	32	5	58.9%	208,760	4.9	14	1	14	0	3	14
Nashville	Tennessee	115	40	6	44.7%	204,780	6.6	22	1	22	0	0	22
Pittsburgh	Pennsylvania	104	33	7	30.0%	204,603	7.9	39	1	39	0	0	39
Richmond	Virginia	108	30	6	51.2%	200,347	5.8	15	1	15	0	1	15
Albuquerque	New Mexico	122	39	6	30.0%	196,712	8.0	17	1	17	0	0	17
Santa Ana	California	110	37	4	55.0%	196,259	5.5	6	1	6	0	0	6
Vancouver	Washington	113	30	3	60.0%	195,608	5.0	11	1	11	0	0	11
Irvine	California	129	42	3	72.9%	195,063	3.8	9	1	9	1	1	9
Stockton	California	124	40	6	51.9%	193,924	5.3	12	1	12	0	3	12
Durham	North Carolina	118	29	4	66.0%	191,450	4.4	8	1	8	0	3	8
Flushing	New York	120	30	1	87.1%	187,350	2.5	4	1	4	2	2	4
Newark	New Jersey	119	45	4	65.5%	183,731	4.7	9	1	9	0	1	9
Tallahassee	Florida	122	40	4	63.4%	182,705	4.7	10	1	10	0	1	10
New Orleans	Louisiana	110	32	6	42.7%	182,652	6.8	19	1	19	0	0	19
Katy	Texas	109	26	5	52.8%	181,549	5.3	4	1	4	0	1	4
Dayton	Ohio	113	33	7	37.6%	179,972	7.1	27	1	27	0	0	27
Arlington	Texas	124	39	6	45.2%	179,581	6.3	12	1	12	0	0	12
Chesapeake	Virginia	119	26	2	75.2%	178,961	3.3	6	1	6	0	5	6
Marietta	Georgia	105	33	5	55.2%	177,978	5.6	7	1	7	0	1	7
Tacoma	Washington	138	39	5	53.4%	177,906	5.8	20	1	20	0	1	20
Jersey City	New Jersey	113	27	3	67.4%	176,335	4.6	7	1	7	0	1	7
Laredo	Texas	105	29	4	65.0%	175,990	4.5	6	1	6	0	1	6
Fontana	California	114	35	2	75.0%	175,969	3.0	3	1	3	1	1	3
Akron	Ohio	118	35	4	63.6%	171,895	4.6	17	1	17	0	2	17
Jamaica	New York	116	27	3	70.0%	170,733	4.0	6	2	12	0	0	12
Memphis	Tennessee	114	34	7	24.3%	168,782	8.7	26	1	26	0	0	26
Woodbridge	Virginia	107	32	2	78.3%	165,689	3.0	3	1	3	1	1	3
Sacramento	California	118	44	10	20.4%	164,266	8.9	28	1	28	0	0	28
Toledo	Ohio	120	35	4	53.1%	163,272	5.8	15	1	15	0	1	15
Fremont	California	111	30	4	70.0%	163,209	4.0	4	1	4	0	0	4
Gilbert	Arizona	121	47	3	68.3%	163,041	4.0	6	1	6	0	2	6
Norfolk	Virginia	118	32	4	66.3%	162,779	4.4	14	1	14	0	3	14
Plano	Texas	112	46	5	52.7%	160,857	5.7	7	1	7	0	1	7
Rochester	New York	121	29	8	34.0%	160,324	7.5	24	1	24	0	0	24
Glendale	Arizona	122	49	6	52.5%	159,934	5.7	9	1	9	0	1	9
Salt Lake City	Utah	107	33	7	32.7%	159,391	7.8	19	1	19	0	0	19
Madison	Wisconsin	118	35	6	53.5%	157,823	6.1	14	1	14	0	1	14
Port Saint Lucie	Florida	118	35	2	77.5%	157,397	3.5	6	1	6	0	3	6
Tucson	Arizona	117	40	9	17.3%	156,634	9.2	32	1	32	0	0	31
Gainesville	Florida	119	38	2	74.4%	155,783	3.7	10	1	10	1	1	10
Lawrenceville	Georgia	105	27	5	60.0%	153,667	5.0	4	1	4	0	0	4
Reading	Pennsylvania	114	21	4	70.0%	150,721	4.0	10	1	10	0	0	10
Austin	Texas	116	41	10	13.8%	150,279	10.1	44	1	44	0	0	17
Bradenton	Florida	108	28	6	58.5%	148,179	5.4	10	1	10	0	2	10
Mckinney	Texas	99	30	2	78.4%	148,176	3.0	3	1	3	1	1	3
Worcester	Massachusetts	127	42	1	79.8%	148,080	3.3	9	1	9	2	2	9
Reno	Nevada	122	36	5	49.2%	145,984	5.9	12	1	12	0	2	12
San Bernardino	California	111	27	4	58.3%	145,525	5.6	7	1	7	0	1	7
Rancho Cucamonga	California	114	34	1	82.1%	145,045	3.3	4	1	4	1	1	4
Modesto	California	113	33	5	53.8%	142,232	5.6	7	1	7	0	1	7
Kansas City	Missouri	114	33	8	24.6%	140,869	8.6	49	1	49	0	0	49
Garden Grove	California	109	31	1	79.4%	139,589	3.4	5	1	5	1	1	5
Raleigh	North Carolina	106	33	8	25.3%	138,224	8.6	15	1	15	0	0	15
Greensboro	North Carolina	109	26	6	42.0%	137,663	6.7	9	1	9	0	0	9
Birmingham	Alabama	125	40	8	27.3%	136,364	8.3	30	1	30	0	0	30
Edmond	Oklahoma	128	29	1	77.8%	133,588	3.4	5	1	5	1	1	5
Grand Prairie	Texas	115	28	3	70.0%	133,382	4.0	4	2	8	0	0	8
Littleton	Colorado	117	34	6	41.0%	133,334	6.7	10	1	10	0	0	10
Newport News	Virginia	128	23	3	74.8%	132,126	3.7	7	1	7	0	1	7
Irving	Texas	108	37	6	54.9%	132,055	5.5	6	1	6	0	0	6
Garland	Texas	118	28	5	54.9%	130,718	5.4	5	1	5	0	1	5
Murfreesboro	Tennessee	110	26	3	70.0%	130,448	4.0	5	1	5	0	0	5
Anchorage	Alaska	123	37	6	53.4%	130,313	5.6	12	1	12	0	2	12
Fort Wayne	Indiana	114	29	6	40.8%	129,828	6.8	16	1	16	0	0	16
Trenton	New Jersey	113	35	3	61.9%	128,805	4.8	11	2	12	0	3	12
Chula Vista	California	117	36	6	49.4%	128,780	6.2	5	1	5	0	0	5
Brownsville	Texas	103	27	3	64.0%	128,745	4.3	3	1	3	0	1	3
Arvada	Colorado	115	28	1	95.9%	127,940	1.6	5	1	5	4	4	5
Mobile	Alabama	115	34	7	47.1%	127,916	6.5	18	1	18	0	0	18
Oxnard	California	123	32	3	57.4%	126,410	5.8	4	1	4	0	1	4
Yonkers	New York	122	34	4	70.0%	126,372	4.0	5	1	5	0	0	5
Spokane	Washington	117	36	7	35.1%	126,081	7.6	14	1	14	0	0	14
Silver Spring	Maryland	114	30	7	41.4%	125,504	6.9	7	1	7	0	0	7
Indianapolis	Indiana	125	42	10	13.2%	125,334	10.5	37	1	37	0	0	6
Schenectady	New York	120	31	2	77.1%	124,922	3.3	8	1	8	2	2	8
Moreno Valley	California	112	30	4	60.0%	123,272	5.0	4	1	4	0	0	4
Ogden	Utah	117	25	5	60.0%	120,858	5.0	5	1	5	0	0	5
Sarasota	Florida	115	36	5	48.2%	120,631	6.1	13	1	13	0	0	13
Oceanside	California	115	36	5	60.0%	120,155	5.0	4	1	4	0	0	4
Grand Rapids	Michigan	116	28	8	32.4%	119,177	7.8	12	1	12	0	0	12
Erie	Pennsylvania	119	29	4	64.8%	118,861	4.3	13	1	13	0	3	13
Boca Raton	Florida	114	38	6	52.9%	117,670	5.7	9	1	9	0	1	9
Seattle	Washington	123	43	11	12.3%	117,239	9.9	35	1	35	0	0	24
Pasadena	California	121	34	3	73.9%	116,528	3.5	6	1	6	0	3	6
Huntington Beach	California	116	48	4	58.3%	116,504	5.3	4	1	4	0	0	4
Naperville	Illinois	107	36	4	70.0%	116,065	4.0	4	1	4	0	0	4
Shreveport	Louisiana	115	35	6	51.8%	115,700	6.0	12	1	12	0	0	12
Torrance	California	111	27	3	65.2%	115,315	4.6	5	1	5	0	1	5
Alpharetta	Georgia	107	39	5	60.9%	115,238	5.3	4	1	4	0	1	4
Olympia	Washington	122	38	4	62.5%	114,363	5.0	6	1	6	0	2	6
Las Cruces	New Mexico	111	28	2	76.3%	113,654	3.6	7	1	7	1	1	7
Denver	Colorado	112	47	10	10.4%	113,440	10.8	38	1	38	0	0	3
San Mateo	California	109	28	1	79.3%	112,958	3.3	4	1	4	1	1	4
Lake Worth	Florida	114	40	5	54.6%	112,772	5.6	5	1	5	0	0	5
Laurel	Maryland	103	27	1	100.0%	112,472	1.0	4	2	8	4	8	8
Harrisburg	Pennsylvania	114	32	4	66.3%	112,336	4.7	9	1	9	0	1	9
Ontario	California	107	24	4	63.1%	111,471	4.7	3	2	4	0	0	4
Whittier	California	115	25	4	56.2%	110,295	5.3	6	1	6	0	0	6
Fayetteville	North Carolina	114	34	7	45.1%	110,101	6.8	8	1	8	0	0	8
Clearwater	Florida	116	35	4	60.0%	109,982	5.0	9	1	9	0	0	9
Pomona	California	100	23	2	69.5%	109,870	4.0	3	1	3	0	1	3
Elk Grove	California	107	27	4	61.0%	109,382	5.0	3	1	3	0	1	3
Melbourne	Florida	120	33	4	70.0%	108,980	4.0	5	1	5	0	0	5
Ann Arbor	Michigan	116	24	3	65.3%	108,900	4.2	5	1	5	0	3	5
Jacksonville	Florida	111	39	12	12.5%	107,986	9.5	31	1	31	0	0	31
Chandler	Arizona	111	38	6	40.0%	107,446	7.0	6	1	6	0	0	6
Pueblo	Colorado	126	38	3	67.9%	107,365	4.1	7	1	7	0	2	7
North Hollywood	California	104	33	3	70.0%	107,190	4.0	4	1	4	0	0	4
Ocala	Florida	110	33	5	47.6%	107,067	6.2	11	1	11	0	0	11
Racine	Wisconsin	108	40	2	84.7%	106,827	2.8	5	1	5	2	3	5
Manassas	Virginia	100	17	4	70.0%	106,348	4.0	4	1	4	0	0	4
Corpus Christi	Texas	115	29	8	32.5%	105,954	7.7	18	1	18	0	0	18
Evansville	Indiana	117	31	5	57.1%	105,439	5.3	9	1	9	0	2	9
El Cajon	California	111	35	5	60.0%	103,478	5.0	3	1	3	0	0	3
Bridgeport	Connecticut	102	29	4	69.7%	102,071	4.0	6	1	6	0	1	6
Kalamazoo	Michigan	110	35	4	62.1%	101,959	5.1	7	1	7	0	2	7
Flint	Michigan	111	21	3	65.3%	101,489	4.6	7	1	7	0	1	7
Gaithersburg	Maryland	111	35	3	70.0%	101,214	4.0	5	1	5	0	0	5
Van Nuys	California	115	31	5	56.9%	101,149	5.3	4	1	4	0	0	4
Green Bay	Wisconsin	110	32	6	55.1%	101,007	5.6	7	1	7	0	1	7
Tempe	Arizona	111	35	5	53.0%	100,682	5.3	4	1	4	0	1	4
Roanoke	Virginia	120	35	4	59.3%	100,570	5.4	10	1	10	0	2	10
Roswell	Georgia	102	35	1	100.0%	99,770	1.0	2	1	2	2	2	2
Sunnyvale	California	112	27	3	65.2%	99,618	4.5	4	1	4	0	0	4
Syracuse	New York	114	28	6	43.9%	99,597	6.6	15	1	15	0	0	15
Killeen	Texas	105	31	4	66.1%	99,233	4.3	4	1	4	0	1	4
Santa Rosa	California	113	29	6	45.9%	99,168	6.5	6	1	6	0	0	6
Kennesaw	Georgia	102	33	1	100.0%	99,130	1.0	2	1	2	2	2	2
Greeley	Colorado	107	35	1	85.3%	97,308	2.5	2	1	2	1	1	2
Bethlehem	Pennsylvania	110	33	3	77.7%	97,236	3.3	4	1	4	1	1	4
Allentown	Pennsylvania	121	34	4	56.9%	96,749	6.1	7	1	7	0	0	7
Eugene	Oregon	109	33	6	47.6%	96,642	6.5	6	1	6	0	0	6
Hayward	California	122	23	4	50.0%	96,017	6.0	4	1	4	0	0	4
Peoria	Arizona	106	29	5	55.4%	95,349	5.5	4	2	7	0	0	7
Billings	Montana	109	24	3	69.3%	95,161	4.5	4	1	4	0	2	4
Missouri City	Texas	108	24	1	89.7%	95,130	2.5	2	1	2	1	1	2
Fairfax	Virginia	105	28	4	58.1%	95,067	5.3	4	1	4	0	0	4
Salinas	California	111	31	6	50.0%	94,164	6.0	5	1	5	0	0	5
Savannah	Georgia	111	30	7	39.0%	94,060	7.1	10	1	10	0	0	10
Hesperia	California	99	28	2	90.0%	93,430	2.0	2	1	2	0	2	2
Canton	Ohio	114	37	5	63.6%	93,416	4.8	12	2	19	0	2	19
Beaumont	Texas	109	20	4	63.9%	92,979	5.1	8	1	8	0	0	8
Metairie	Louisiana	106	33	5	65.3%	92,911	4.4	5	1	5	0	1	5
Auburn	Washington	110	31	2	82.2%	92,732	3.0	3	1	3	1	1	3
Lincoln	Nebraska	111	32	9	31.9%	92,267	7.5	22	1	22	0	0	22
Lancaster	California	116	38	4	50.0%	92,210	6.0	3	1	3	0	0	3
Springfield	Missouri	106	33	6	40.0%	92,150	7.0	7	2	10	0	0	10
Boston	Massachusetts	113	31	5	60.6%	91,936	5.6	14	1	14	0	2	14
Frederick	Maryland	107	24	4	69.6%	91,806	4.3	4	1	4	0	1	4
Odessa	Texas	107	26	5	57.3%	91,726	5.5	6	1	6	0	1	6
New Port Richey	Florida	124	38	2	75.8%	91,604	3.3	4	1	4	1	1	4
Orlando	Florida	110	43	10	9.2%	91,579	10.9	32	1	32	0	0	1
Longmont	Colorado	109	33	4	70.0%	91,536	4.0	3	1	3	0	0	3
Kent	Washington	113	32	4	56.9%	91,276	5.3	4	1	4	0	1	4
Visalia	California	116	31	5	60.0%	91,208	5.0	3	1	3	0	0	3
Little Rock	Arkansas	103	25	6	41.8%	91,056	6.8	12	1	12	0	0	12
Provo	Utah	108	34	2	78.0%	90,931	3.0	3	1	3	0	2	3
Appleton	Wisconsin	105	23	3	74.3%	90,409	3.5	4	1	4	0	2	4
Bloomington	Indiana	109	26	4	67.5%	90,155	4.5	6	1	6	0	1	6
Stamford	Connecticut	113	30	2	70.0%	90,123	4.0	6	1	6	0	0	6
Simi Valley	California	109	34	3	70.0%	90,098	4.0	2	1	2	0	0	2
Columbia	South Carolina	121	39	6	26.2%	89,768	8.4	14	2	17	0	0	17
Santa Fe	New Mexico	109	27	4	70.0%	89,660	4.0	5	1	5	0	0	5
Yuma	Arizona	106	32	6	60.3%	89,006	5.0	3	1	3	0	1	3
Norman	Oklahoma	116	22	4	71.6%	88,842	4.5	4	1	4	0	2	4
Tyler	Texas	115	31	4	56.8%	88,738	5.7	9	1	9	0	1	9
Jupiter	Florida	113	36	2	90.0%	88,706	2.0	4	1	4	0	4	4
Sandy	Utah	115	31	3	80.0%	88,351	3.0	4	1	4	0	4	4
Douglasville	Georgia	104	21	3	80.0%	88,198	3.0	2	1	2	0	2	2
Clarksville	Tennessee	104	27	4	50.0%	87,849	6.0	3	1	3	0	0	3
Greenville	South Carolina	108	29	5	40.0%	87,810	7.0	9	1	9	0	0	9
Kenosha	Wisconsin	117	20	1	77.8%	87,782	3.3	4	1	4	1	1	4
Palm Bay	Florida	107	28	1	78.3%	87,143	3.3	4	1	4	1	1	4
Fort Myers	Florida	112	37	8	34.5%	86,832	7.5	11	1	11	0	0	11
Topeka	Kansas	130	37	5	53.1%	86,818	5.7	18	1	18	0	2	18
Jackson	Mississippi	114	34	6	50.9%	86,726	6.1	11	1	11	0	1	11
West Jordan	Utah	109	23	3	70.0%	86,499	4.0	3	1	3	0	0	3
Bellevue	Washington	116	31	4	58.7%	85,892	5.2	5	1	5	0	0	5
Mcallen	Texas	104	27	3	60.0%	84,953	5.0	3	1	3	0	0	3
Conroe	Texas	104	28	5	52.5%	84,135	5.6	7	1	7	0	1	7
Santa Barbara	California	123	36	3	61.8%	83,913	4.7	7	1	7	0	1	7
Roseville	California	117	33	5	60.0%	83,876	5.0	3	1	3	0	0	3
Albany	New York	113	32	4	55.4%	83,782	5.7	11	1	11	0	1	11
Vista	California	108	36	2	69.8%	83,633	4.0	3	1	3	0	1	3
Fullerton	California	114	36	4	60.0%	83,566	5.0	4	1	4	0	0	4
Elgin	Illinois	104	25	3	68.3%	83,512	4.3	3	1	3	0	1	3
Summerville	South Carolina	98	28	4	60.0%	83,365	5.0	2	1	2	0	0	2
Everett	Washington	105	31	6	50.0%	83,336	6.0	5	1	5	0	0	5
Champaign	Illinois	107	21	1	87.9%	83,120	2.0	3	1	3	2	2	3
Lewisville	Texas	108	28	4	70.0%	83,075	4.0	3	1	3	0	0	3
Pearland	Texas	104	28	4	60.0%	82,559	5.0	2	1	2	0	0	2
Madera	California	114	23	3	80.0%	82,372	3.0	3	1	3	0	3	3
Carlsbad	California	115	36	2	72.4%	82,301	3.5	4	1	4	1	1	4
Hamilton	Ohio	107	26	4	60.0%	82,259	5.0	3	1	3	0	0	3
Bryan	Texas	112	32	1	85.3%	82,153	2.2	5	1	5	3	3	5
Palmdale	California	109	34	6	46.9%	82,054	6.3	4	1	4	0	0	4
Concord	California	108	33	5	63.0%	81,989	4.8	4	1	4	0	0	4
Bell Gardens	California	100	21	3	80.0%	81,946	3.0	1	1	1	0	1	1
Naples	Florida	109	32	7	26.1%	81,835	8.3	14	1	14	0	0	14
Victorville	California	112	29	4	60.0%	81,786	5.0	3	1	3	0	0	3
Lexington	Kentucky	109	29	9	25.5%	81,536	8.2	15	1	15	0	0	15
Waco	Texas	130	36	6	51.4%	81,400	5.7	9	1	9	0	1	9
Surprise	Arizona	115	38	4	60.0%	81,335	5.0	4	1	4	0	0	4
Cumming	Georgia	101	28	6	50.0%	81,010	6.0	3	1	3	0	0	3
Waterbury	Connecticut	116	30	2	73.9%	80,303	3.5	6	1	6	1	1	6
Coral Springs	Florida	100	23	1	82.3%	80,018	2.5	2	1	2	1	1	2
Midland	Texas	108	29	6	50.0%	79,995	6.0	5	1	5	0	0	5
Salem	Oregon	110	32	6	30.0%	79,962	8.0	7	1	7	0	0	7
Nampa	Idaho	104	28	3	68.8%	79,720	4.0	3	1	3	0	1	3
Bowie	Maryland	126	27	2	78.0%	79,643	3.3	4	1	4	1	2	4
Murrieta	California	110	35	3	60.0%	79,346	5.0	2	1	2	0	0	2
Rockford	Illinois	121	29	6	43.5%	79,266	6.7	9	1	9	0	0	9
Winston Salem	North Carolina	114	28	8	30.0%	79,239	8.0	9	1	9	0	0	9
York	Pennsylvania	127	44	5	44.0%	79,011	6.6	7	1	7	0	0	7
New Haven	Connecticut	109	33	4	60.6%	78,906	4.4	5	1	5	0	1	5
Montgomery	Alabama	108	30	6	37.5%	78,761	7.1	13	1	13	0	0	13
Saginaw	Michigan	113	27	5	60.2%	78,391	4.7	7	1	7	0	3	7
Sugar Land	Texas	104	28	5	46.4%	78,322	7.0	3	2	6	0	0	6
Riverview	Florida	105	25	3	70.0%	77,933	4.0	3	1	3	0	0	3
Edinburg	Texas	110	24	4	50.0%	77,785	6.0	3	1	3	0	0	3
Cary	North Carolina	115	21	6	50.0%	77,666	6.0	4	1	4	0	0	4
Anderson	South Carolina	108	22	1	78.8%	77,530	3.3	4	1	4	1	1	4
Muskegon	Michigan	103	28	4	60.0%	77,505	5.0	5	1	5	0	0	5
Livonia	Michigan	106	28	1	81.9%	77,471	3.0	3	1	3	1	1	3
Covington	Georgia	118	38	1	83.4%	77,309	3.0	2	2	4	1	2	4
San Jose	California	132	41	11	7.3%	77,172	12.6	28	1	28	0	0	4
Stone Mountain	Georgia	107	23	4	60.0%	76,986	5.0	3	1	3	0	0	3
Lees Summit	Missouri	116	25	1	75.2%	76,794	3.5	6	1	6	1	1	6
Vallejo	California	105	26	5	61.5%	76,513	5.0	4	1	4	0	1	4
Idaho Falls	Idaho	117	34	4	70.0%	76,315	4.0	4	1	4	0	0	4
Plainfield	Illinois	106	27	3	76.9%	75,775	4.0	3	1	3	1	1	3
Burbank	California	122	31	2	70.0%	75,611	4.0	5	1	5	0	0	5
Downey	California	114	24	4	67.0%	75,602	4.0	3	1	3	0	1	3
Midlothian	Virginia	101	27	1	77.8%	75,267	3.0	3	1	3	1	1	3
Homestead	Florida	118	26	6	40.1%	75,176	6.6	7	1	7	0	0	7
South Bend	Indiana	109	25	6	51.2%	75,157	5.7	10	1	10	0	1	10
Joliet	Illinois	108	27	5	58.3%	75,111	4.8	5	1	5	0	2	5
Scranton	Pennsylvania	118	33	3	75.4%	74,977	3.3	8	1	8	2	2	8
Rialto	California	106	32	3	70.0%	74,608	4.0	2	1	2	0	0	2
Warren	Michigan	116	36	4	54.8%	74,149	5.4	5	1	5	0	1	5
Muncie	Indiana	104	27	2	79.9%	74,090	2.8	5	1	5	2	2	5
Pacoima	California	100	26	3	70.0%	74,059	4.0	1	2	2	0	0	2
Bend	Oregon	122	32	5	60.0%	73,354	5.0	3	1	3	0	0	3
Huntsville	Alabama	109	29	8	37.4%	73,351	7.2	11	1	11	0	0	11
Vero Beach	Florida	110	24	4	63.6%	73,332	4.5	6	1	6	0	1	6
Macon	Georgia	116	36	6	44.7%	73,119	6.8	9	1	9	0	0	9
Livermore	California	116	31	2	75.7%	72,902	3.5	2	1	2	0	1	2
Clovis	California	103	28	5	60.0%	72,832	5.0	3	2	6	0	0	6
Falls Church	Virginia	125	31	4	60.0%	72,220	5.0	5	1	5	0	0	5
Youngstown	Ohio	130	36	6	45.9%	72,088	6.3	12	1	12	0	0	12
Myrtle Beach	South Carolina	109	27	4	49.2%	71,589	5.6	5	1	5	0	1	5
Santa Maria	California	110	26	6	50.0%	71,545	6.0	3	1	3	0	0	3
Woodstock	Georgia	102	25	2	70.0%	71,205	4.0	2	1	2	0	0	2
Colorado Springs	Colorado	117	48	10	12.2%	71,103	10.1	30	1	30	0	0	22
Charleston	South Carolina	103	33	6	36.0%	70,927	7.7	10	2	20	0	0	20
La Puente	California	111	33	4	60.0%	70,769	5.0	2	1	2	0	0	2
Lakewood	New Jersey	98	31	4	70.0%	70,534	4.0	1	1	1	0	0	1
Perris	California	109	37	5	60.0%	70,434	5.0	2	1	2	0	0	2
Terre Haute	Indiana	110	35	3	74.0%	70,290	3.5	6	1	6	1	1	6
Medford	Oregon	103	32	3	75.3%	70,245	3.5	2	1	2	0	1	2
Cambridge	Massachusetts	121	28	5	60.4%	69,930	5.2	5	1	5	0	0	5
Saint Charles	Missouri	110	23	6	50.0%	69,929	6.0	3	1	3	0	0	3
North Las Vegas	Nevada	134	37	7	29.8%	69,756	8.1	7	1	7	0	0	7
Cedar Rapids	Iowa	117	29	5	50.0%	69,723	6.0	6	1	6	0	0	6
Fredericksburg	Virginia	114	24	6	40.0%	69,600	7.0	5	1	5	0	0	5
Buford	Georgia	103	22	3	70.0%	69,372	4.0	2	1	2	0	0	2
Amarillo	Texas	125	28	6	30.0%	68,692	8.0	14	1	14	0	0	14
Sparks	Nevada	115	23	3	57.5%	68,634	5.5	4	1	4	0	1	4
Elizabeth	New Jersey	121	32	3	68.3%	68,617	4.0	3	1	3	0	1	3
Boynton Beach	Florida	111	30	4	39.4%	68,505	7.2	6	1	6	0	0	6
Menifee	California	105	28	4	62.0%	68,491	4.8	4	1	4	0	0	4
Ballwin	Missouri	100	13	3	72.2%	68,332	3.5	2	1	2	0	1	2
Costa Mesa	California	106	44	4	60.0%	68,252	5.0	2	1	2	0	0	2
Franklin	Tennessee	101	32	4	63.7%	67,780	4.7	3	1	3	0	1	3
Rapid City	South Dakota	104	25	4	70.0%	67,736	4.0	3	1	3	0	0	3
Sylmar	California	97	19	2	70.0%	67,541	4.0	1	1	1	0	0	1
O Fallon	Missouri	109	34	4	70.0%	67,522	4.0	2	1	2	0	0	2
Lake Charles	Louisiana	113	35	6	51.6%	67,443	5.8	5	1	5	0	0	5
Omaha	Nebraska	110	35	10	12.2%	67,440	10.5	31	1	31	0	0	5
Ashburn	Virginia	103	28	5	60.0%	67,384	5.0	2	1	2	0	0	2
Humble	Texas	103	19	5	40.4%	67,291	7.0	3	1	3	0	0	3
Pittsburg	California	99	26	2	70.0%	67,257	4.0	1	1	1	0	0	1
College Station	Texas	102	24	4	54.6%	67,211	5.5	2	1	2	0	0	2
Spartanburg	South Carolina	106	31	4	60.0%	67,174	5.0	5	1	5	0	0	5
South Gate	California	100	28	3	70.0%	66,572	4.0	1	1	1	0	0	1
Dearborn	Michigan	113	25	3	70.0%	66,562	4.0	4	2	8	0	0	8
Duluth	Minnesota	113	24	6	56.8%	66,543	5.6	11	1	11	0	2	11
Chino	California	102	33	3	70.4%	66,521	3.5	2	1	2	0	1	2
West Chester	Pennsylvania	114	28	3	61.2%	66,473	3.7	3	1	3	1	1	3
Antioch	California	106	24	4	60.0%	66,433	5.0	2	2	4	0	0	4
Lynn	Massachusetts	113	36	3	70.8%	66,183	4.0	4	1	4	0	1	4
Herndon	Virginia	102	25	3	70.8%	66,143	4.0	2	1	2	0	1	2
Hillsboro	Oregon	101	18	3	64.2%	66,067	4.5	2	1	2	0	1	2
Tracy	California	115	29	4	56.3%	65,938	4.8	4	1	4	0	0	4
Scottsdale	Arizona	107	47	9	22.1%	65,819	8.5	11	1	11	0	0	11
Rio Rancho	New Mexico	103	27	2	67.5%	65,747	4.0	2	1	2	0	1	2
Miami Beach	Florida	107	36	4	56.7%	65,549	5.2	5	2	10	0	0	10
Saint Augustine	Florida	118	33	5	50.0%	65,526	6.0	5	1	5	0	0	5
Boise	Idaho	113	32	8	25.6%	65,496	8.8	9	1	9	0	0	8
San Marcos	California	96	22	3	64.9%	65,192	4.5	2	2	4	0	0	4
San Francisco	California	123	38	14	7.5%	65,082	12.6	28	2	56	0	0	4
Belleville	Illinois	110	27	2	69.6%	64,920	4.3	4	1	4	0	1	4
Lubbock	Texas	115	31	9	23.4%	64,604	8.4	14	1	14	0	0	14
Redding	California	114	36	5	57.0%	64,430	5.3	4	1	4	0	0	4
Gastonia	North Carolina	111	26	5	60.0%	64,223	5.0	3	1	3	0	0	3
Kennewick	Washington	105	28	4	64.7%	63,967	4.3	3	1	3	0	0	3
High Point	North Carolina	101	20	4	52.3%	63,965	6.3	4	1	4	0	0	4
Delray Beach	Florida	109	38	7	53.5%	63,683	5.4	5	1	5	0	0	5
Norwalk	California	98	24	4	60.0%	63,532	5.0	1	1	1	0	0	1
Fort Mill	South Carolina	103	28	3	66.6%	63,303	4.3	3	1	3	0	0	3
Bellingham	Washington	114	23	4	50.0%	63,247	6.0	3	1	3	0	0	3
Ypsilanti	Michigan	102	19	5	59.1%	63,190	5.5	2	1	2	0	0	2
Allen	Texas	102	17	5	56.3%	62,696	5.5	2	1	2	0	0	2
Rockville	Maryland	107	30	5	43.2%	62,593	6.8	4	1	4	0	0	4
Manchester	New Hampshire	106	41	5	53.4%	62,005	4.8	5	1	5	0	2	5
Merced	California	115	31	5	60.0%	61,836	5.0	3	1	3	0	0	3
Hartford	Connecticut	109	29	4	50.0%	61,689	6.0	6	1	6	0	0	6
Denton	Texas	112	30	5	38.4%	60,779	7.2	6	1	6	0	0	6
Beaverton	Oregon	111	21	6	30.0%	60,491	8.0	4	1	4	0	0	4
Lynchburg	Virginia	111	20	6	58.6%	59,968	4.8	4	1	4	0	1	4
Acworth	Georgia	101	26	4	60.0%	59,810	5.0	2	1	2	0	0	2
Broomfield	Colorado	104	22	3	56.1%	58,785	5.0	3	1	3	0	1	3
Apopka	Florida	118	26	4	60.0%	58,592	5.0	2	1	2	0	0	2
Waukegan	Illinois	104	26	4	60.0%	58,517	5.0	2	1	2	0	0	2
Lawrence	Kansas	128	22	4	57.9%	58,470	5.4	5	1	5	0	0	5
Fort Collins	Colorado	108	32	8	29.9%	58,174	7.6	5	1	5	0	0	5
Hawthorne	California	98	26	3	60.0%	58,102	5.0	1	1	1	0	0	1
Lithonia	Georgia	103	26	5	60.0%	58,057	5.0	2	1	2	0	0	2
Palo Alto	California	119	29	4	60.0%	58,009	5.0	4	1	4	0	0	4
Olathe	Kansas	104	31	5	40.0%	57,749	7.0	2	1	2	0	0	2
Indio	California	96	22	4	60.0%	57,655	5.0	2	1	2	0	0	2
Elkhart	Indiana	106	21	6	57.9%	57,570	5.0	3	1	3	0	1	3
Augusta	Georgia	108	28	7	28.0%	57,260	8.5	8	1	8	0	0	8
Davenport	Iowa	110	36	5	54.5%	57,123	5.5	6	1	6	0	1	6
Yakima	Washington	110	29	7	43.9%	57,058	6.5	4	1	4	0	0	4
Columbus	Ohio	112	39	13	6.7%	56,977	13.3	30	1	30	0	0	0
Grand Junction	Colorado	110	35	5	53.9%	56,890	5.8	6	1	6	0	0	6
Gulfport	Mississippi	102	24	5	60.0%	56,831	5.0	3	1	3	0	0	3
San Leandro	California	111	26	5	51.1%	56,793	6.0	3	1	3	0	0	3
Charlottesville	Virginia	114	21	7	46.0%	56,554	6.4	5	1	5	0	0	5
Quincy	Massachusetts	101	28	4	60.0%	56,473	5.0	3	1	3	0	0	3
El Monte	California	118	34	4	60.0%	56,227	5.0	2	1	2	0	0	2
Panama City	Florida	107	32	6	44.3%	55,988	6.5	6	1	6	0	0	6
San Diego	California	104	44	13	4.1%	55,901	15.7	36	1	36	0	0	0
Compton	California	106	37	5	40.0%	55,550	7.0	3	1	3	0	0	3
Boulder	Colorado	115	31	6	41.9%	55,051	6.7	6	1	6	0	0	6
Wilmington	Delaware	106	32	6	25.0%	54,912	8.6	10	2	20	0	0	15
Sioux Falls	South Dakota	128	40	7	30.0%	54,500	8.0	9	1	9	0	0	9
Hampton	Virginia	105	29	6	40.0%	54,492	7.0	6	1	6	0	0	6
Mission Viejo	California	100	30	5	55.2%	54,257	5.5	2	1	2	0	0	2
Fort Pierce	Florida	122	32	6	55.3%	52,964	5.6	8	1	8	0	1	8
Round Rock	Texas	102	21	5	31.5%	52,846	7.7	3	1	3	0	0	3
Longview	Texas	110	30	6	50.0%	52,640	6.0	5	1	5	0	0	5
Holland	Michigan	98	22	3	55.5%	52,065	5.5	2	1	2	0	0	2
Escondido	California	110	23	8	28.9%	51,981	8.3	4	1	4	0	0	4
Frisco	Texas	120	28	6	30.0%	51,734	8.0	2	1	2	0	0	2
Daytona Beach	Florida	118	30	5	50.0%	51,548	6.0	5	1	5	0	0	5
Cypress	Texas	111	36	7	30.0%	51,180	8.0	2	1	2	0	0	2
Athens	Georgia	114	31	6	40.6%	50,573	6.5	6	1	6	0	0	6
Parker	Colorado	102	23	5	50.0%	50,141	6.0	2	1	2	0	0	2
Decatur	Georgia	106	29	8	27.7%	50,029	8.4	5	2	10	0	0	10
Johnson City	Tennessee	107	34	6	52.3%	49,899	5.8	4	1	4	0	0	4
Fargo	North Dakota	114	32	7	40.4%	49,467	6.5	4	1	4	0	0	4
Hialeah	Florida	119	30	8	13.4%	49,094	9.6	7	1	7	0	0	7
Chapel Hill	North Carolina	113	26	4	50.0%	48,974	6.0	3	1	3	0	0	3
Hagerstown	Maryland	105	27	3	50.0%	48,968	6.0	3	1	3	0	0	3
Independence	Missouri	121	29	7	39.4%	48,853	6.9	8	1	8	0	0	8
Carrollton	Texas	103	34	5	36.2%	48,811	7.3	3	1	3	0	0	3
Missoula	Montana	104	30	6	50.0%	48,642	6.0	5	1	5	0	0	5
Virginia Beach	Virginia	124	28	11	10.7%	48,095	10.8	12	1	12	0	0	1
Richardson	Texas	111	33	5	41.7%	47,745	7.0	3	1	3	0	0	3
Morgantown	West Virginia	105	23	5	50.0%	47,643	6.0	3	1	3	0	0	3
New Bedford	Massachusetts	105	27	4	50.0%	47,407	6.0	4	1	4	0	0	4
Baytown	Texas	101	23	6	40.0%	47,117	7.0	3	1	3	0	0	3
Deltona	Florida	109	30	5	50.0%	46,945	6.0	2	1	2	0	0	2
Springdale	Arkansas	102	20	5	47.6%	45,855	6.5	2	1	2	0	0	2
Newnan	Georgia	99	24	5	48.9%	45,630	6.5	2	1	2	0	0	2
Inglewood	California	131	40	6	33.5%	44,759	7.4	5	1	5	0	0	5
San Angelo	Texas	121	32	7	40.0%	44,307	7.0	4	1	4	0	0	4
Mission	Texas	136	51	8	24.4%	44,236	38.0	2	1	2	0	0	2
Mesquite	Texas	108	38	7	30.0%	43,894	8.0	3	1	3	0	0	3
Annapolis	Maryland	106	30	6	46.1%	43,816	6.2	5	1	5	0	0	5
West Covina	California	108	25	5	40.0%	43,763	7.0	3	1	3	0	0	3
Pensacola	Florida	125	44	9	15.9%	42,654	9.3	13	1	13	0	0	13
Paterson	New Jersey	125	33	6	29.2%	42,590	8.1	9	1	9	0	0	9
New Braunfels	Texas	101	29	5	40.0%	41,117	7.0	2	1	2	0	0	2
Mcdonough	Georgia	114	27	5	40.0%	40,585	7.0	2	1	2	0	0	2
Ventura	California	97	29	7	34.5%	40,015	7.7	3	1	3	0	0	3
Portsmouth	Virginia	126	35	7	41.7%	39,762	7.0	7	1	7	0	0	7
Broken Arrow	Oklahoma	113	18	6	30.0%	39,149	8.0	3	1	3	0	0	3
Abilene	Texas	110	27	7	30.0%	39,080	7.5	6	1	6	0	0	6
Puyallup	Washington	102	28	6	27.2%	38,847	8.2	5	1	5	0	0	5
Napa	California	104	29	6	40.0%	38,666	7.0	2	1	2	0	0	2
Lafayette	Louisiana	112	31	9	23.8%	38,196	8.6	5	2	8	0	0	7
Berkeley	California	123	36	5	30.0%	38,138	8.0	9	1	9	0	0	9
Santa Clara	California	106	29	6	30.0%	37,655	8.0	4	1	4	0	0	4
Lansing	Michigan	118	32	7	22.7%	37,336	8.6	7	1	7	0	0	7
Toms River	New Jersey	112	25	7	30.3%	37,177	8.3	3	1	3	0	0	3
Tuscaloosa	Alabama	109	36	8	30.0%	36,792	8.0	4	1	4	0	0	4
Baton Rouge	Louisiana	115	25	11	9.5%	36,170	11.7	18	1	18	0	0	2
Fairfield	California	104	33	6	30.0%	34,224	8.0	2	1	2	0	0	2
Chico	California	110	28	6	30.0%	33,605	8.0	3	1	3	0	0	3
Clinton Township	Michigan	112	29	7	33.2%	33,301	8.0	3	1	3	0	0	3
Knoxville	Tennessee	126	35	11	8.6%	33,207	11.6	17	1	17	0	0	1
Keller	Texas	96	19	7	26.8%	31,127	8.0	2	1	2	0	0	2
Temecula	California	110	42	5	23.5%	30,532	8.3	3	1	3	0	0	3
Providence	Rhode Island	120	28	8	14.0%	28,792	9.9	8	1	8	0	0	4
Milton	Florida	121	33	7	30.0%	28,422	8.0	3	2	6	0	0	6
Spring Hill	Florida	110	29	9	22.1%	27,665	10.0	5	2	6	0	0	3
Renton	Washington	111	28	9	16.0%	24,799	9.8	5	1	5	0	0	2
Kissimmee	Florida	117	35	11	8.5%	24,535	11.6	7	1	7	0	0	0
Redwood City	California	108	31	7	21.0%	24,064	23.8	4	2	4	0	0	2
Vacaville	California	101	19	9	22.6%	23,771	9.5	2	1	2	0	0	1
Bowling Green	Kentucky	116	30	8	20.0%	23,112	8.8	4	2	8	0	0	8
Daly City	California	111	31	9	20.0%	22,880	9.0	2	1	2	0	0	2
Lynnwood	Washington	107	32	9	20.9%	22,605	9.0	3	1	3	0	0	3
Hemet	California	105	35	7	16.3%	20,952	9.7	3	1	3	0	0	2
Chattanooga	Tennessee	122	34	11	9.6%	19,992	11.7	15	1	15	0	0	2
Asheville	North Carolina	108	27	8	15.0%	19,866	9.4	5	1	5	0	0	5
Waukesha	Wisconsin	112	21	6	20.0%	19,159	9.0	3	1	3	0	0	3
Clermont	Florida	113	25	9	17.9%	17,897	10.0	3	1	3	0	0	2
Des Moines	Iowa	105	29	10	7.1%	15,919	12.8	11	2	19	0	0	1
Lehigh Acres	Florida	104	19	11	13.5%	15,826	10.5	6	1	6	0	0	3
Sterling Heights	Michigan	106	27	11	11.9%	15,812	11.3	4	1	4	0	0	1
Valdosta	Georgia	112	34	7	16.4%	15,574	9.0	5	1	5	0	0	5
Hyattsville	Maryland	126	29	9	9.6%	15,144	10.6	5	1	5	0	0	3
Edison	New Jersey	121	25	8	13.8%	13,962	9.7	3	1	3	0	0	3
Lowell	Massachusetts	123	33	8	12.0%	13,316	10.5	4	1	4	0	0	2
Rock Hill	South Carolina	101	24	9	9.0%	10,472	11.0	3	1	3	0	0	0
Santa Cruz	California	110	26	9	10.0%	10,405	10.0	4	1	4	0	0	4
Santa Monica	California	108	33	10	10.6%	10,021	10.4	5	1	5	0	0	1
Cape Coral	Florida	114	31	13	5.5%	9,985	14.5	6	1	6	0	0	0
Orem	Utah	102	29	9	9.8%	9,815	10.3	3	1	3	0	0	2
Brockton	Massachusetts	103	21	10	10.0%	9,543	10.0	2	1	2	0	0	2
Wichita Falls	Texas	106	29	10	9.0%	8,896	11.0	7	1	7	0	0	0
Largo	Florida	113	28	12	8.2%	8,802	12.0	5	1	5	0	0	2
Federal Way	Washington	107	28	10	8.5%	8,514	11.5	2	1	2	0	0	0
Bothell	Washington	112	31	11	6.5%	8,341	13.7	3	1	3	0	0	0
Englewood	Colorado	103	28	13	6.3%	7,037	13.8	4	2	4	0	0	0
Westerville	Ohio	98	23	12	7.0%	6,665	13.0	2	1	2	0	0	0
Overland Park	Kansas	111	28	16	3.4%	6,193	16.7	9	1	9	0	0	0
Astoria	New York	111	26	16	3.1%	4,356	17.0	4	2	8	0	0	0
Ridgewood	New York	96	19	15	4.0%	4,269	16.0	1	1	1	0	0	0
Winter Haven	Florida	104	22	13	3.0%	3,206	17.0	3	1	3	0	0	0
Florissant	Missouri	108	23	14	2.0%	2,166	18.0	3	1	3	0	0	0
Henrico	Virginia	110	8	27	0.9%	1,680	31.9	7	1	7	0	0	0
Meridian	Idaho	99	16	13	1.6%	1,634	18.5	2	1	2	0	0	0
Orange	California	108	52	36	0.8%	1,175	38.0	5	1	5	0	0	0
Elmhurst	New York	98	22	18	1.0%	940	19.0	1	1	1	0	0	0

California

City	Competition	Business intelligence metrics	RAW Data (Google Search Results across all ZIPs)
Los Angeles	110	47	4	54.4%	1,336,629	5.6	62	1	62	0	9	62
Long Beach	123	44	2	71.1%	340,317	4.0	12	1	12	0	4	12
Oakland	120	34	5	64.5%	265,475	4.6	14	1	14	0	2	14
Corona	161	53	1	98.6%	253,782	1.2	5	1	5	4	5	5
Fresno	125	33	8	37.0%	222,815	7.5	18	1	18	0	0	18
Anaheim	114	43	3	60.0%	221,176	5.0	7	2	14	0	0	14
Bakersfield	112	30	8	39.3%	219,607	7.2	11	1	11	0	0	11
Riverside	110	39	4	57.3%	212,129	5.3	7	1	7	0	0	7
Santa Ana	110	37	4	55.0%	196,259	5.5	6	1	6	0	0	6
Irvine	129	42	3	72.9%	195,063	3.8	9	1	9	1	1	9
Stockton	124	40	6	51.9%	193,924	5.3	12	1	12	0	3	12
Fontana	114	35	2	75.0%	175,969	3.0	3	1	3	1	1	3
Sacramento	118	44	10	20.4%	164,266	8.9	28	1	28	0	0	28
Fremont	111	30	4	70.0%	163,209	4.0	4	1	4	0	0	4
San Bernardino	111	27	4	58.3%	145,525	5.6	7	1	7	0	1	7
Rancho Cucamonga	114	34	1	82.1%	145,045	3.3	4	1	4	1	1	4
Modesto	113	33	5	53.8%	142,232	5.6	7	1	7	0	1	7
Garden Grove	109	31	1	79.4%	139,589	3.4	5	1	5	1	1	5
Chula Vista	117	36	6	49.4%	128,780	6.2	5	1	5	0	0	5
Oxnard	123	32	3	57.4%	126,410	5.8	4	1	4	0	1	4
Moreno Valley	112	30	4	60.0%	123,272	5.0	4	1	4	0	0	4
Oceanside	115	36	5	60.0%	120,155	5.0	4	1	4	0	0	4
Pasadena	121	34	3	73.9%	116,528	3.5	6	1	6	0	3	6
Huntington Beach	116	48	4	58.3%	116,504	5.3	4	1	4	0	0	4
Torrance	111	27	3	65.2%	115,315	4.6	5	1	5	0	1	5
San Mateo	109	28	1	79.3%	112,958	3.3	4	1	4	1	1	4
Ontario	107	24	4	63.1%	111,471	4.7	3	2	4	0	0	4
Whittier	115	25	4	56.2%	110,295	5.3	6	1	6	0	0	6
Pomona	100	23	2	69.5%	109,870	4.0	3	1	3	0	1	3
Elk Grove	107	27	4	61.0%	109,382	5.0	3	1	3	0	1	3
North Hollywood	104	33	3	70.0%	107,190	4.0	4	1	4	0	0	4
El Cajon	111	35	5	60.0%	103,478	5.0	3	1	3	0	0	3
Van Nuys	115	31	5	56.9%	101,149	5.3	4	1	4	0	0	4
Sunnyvale	112	27	3	65.2%	99,618	4.5	4	1	4	0	0	4
Santa Rosa	113	29	6	45.9%	99,168	6.5	6	1	6	0	0	6
Hayward	122	23	4	50.0%	96,017	6.0	4	1	4	0	0	4
Salinas	111	31	6	50.0%	94,164	6.0	5	1	5	0	0	5
Hesperia	99	28	2	90.0%	93,430	2.0	2	1	2	0	2	2
Lancaster	116	38	4	50.0%	92,210	6.0	3	1	3	0	0	3
Visalia	116	31	5	60.0%	91,208	5.0	3	1	3	0	0	3
Simi Valley	109	34	3	70.0%	90,098	4.0	2	1	2	0	0	2
Santa Barbara	123	36	3	61.8%	83,913	4.7	7	1	7	0	1	7
Roseville	117	33	5	60.0%	83,876	5.0	3	1	3	0	0	3
Vista	108	36	2	69.8%	83,633	4.0	3	1	3	0	1	3
Fullerton	114	36	4	60.0%	83,566	5.0	4	1	4	0	0	4
Madera	114	23	3	80.0%	82,372	3.0	3	1	3	0	3	3
Carlsbad	115	36	2	72.4%	82,301	3.5	4	1	4	1	1	4
Palmdale	109	34	6	46.9%	82,054	6.3	4	1	4	0	0	4
Concord	108	33	5	63.0%	81,989	4.8	4	1	4	0	0	4
Bell Gardens	100	21	3	80.0%	81,946	3.0	1	1	1	0	1	1
Victorville	112	29	4	60.0%	81,786	5.0	3	1	3	0	0	3
Murrieta	110	35	3	60.0%	79,346	5.0	2	1	2	0	0	2
San Jose	132	41	11	7.3%	77,172	12.6	28	1	28	0	0	4
Vallejo	105	26	5	61.5%	76,513	5.0	4	1	4	0	1	4
Burbank	122	31	2	70.0%	75,611	4.0	5	1	5	0	0	5
Downey	114	24	4	67.0%	75,602	4.0	3	1	3	0	1	3
Rialto	106	32	3	70.0%	74,608	4.0	2	1	2	0	0	2
Pacoima	100	26	3	70.0%	74,059	4.0	1	2	2	0	0	2
Livermore	116	31	2	75.7%	72,902	3.5	2	1	2	0	1	2
Clovis	103	28	5	60.0%	72,832	5.0	3	2	6	0	0	6
Santa Maria	110	26	6	50.0%	71,545	6.0	3	1	3	0	0	3
La Puente	111	33	4	60.0%	70,769	5.0	2	1	2	0	0	2
Perris	109	37	5	60.0%	70,434	5.0	2	1	2	0	0	2
Menifee	105	28	4	62.0%	68,491	4.8	4	1	4	0	0	4
Costa Mesa	106	44	4	60.0%	68,252	5.0	2	1	2	0	0	2
Sylmar	97	19	2	70.0%	67,541	4.0	1	1	1	0	0	1
Pittsburg	99	26	2	70.0%	67,257	4.0	1	1	1	0	0	1
South Gate	100	28	3	70.0%	66,572	4.0	1	1	1	0	0	1
Chino	102	33	3	70.4%	66,521	3.5	2	1	2	0	1	2
Antioch	106	24	4	60.0%	66,433	5.0	2	2	4	0	0	4
Tracy	115	29	4	56.3%	65,938	4.8	4	1	4	0	0	4
San Marcos	96	22	3	64.9%	65,192	4.5	2	2	4	0	0	4
San Francisco	123	38	14	7.5%	65,082	12.6	28	2	56	0	0	4
Redding	114	36	5	57.0%	64,430	5.3	4	1	4	0	0	4
Norwalk	98	24	4	60.0%	63,532	5.0	1	1	1	0	0	1
Merced	115	31	5	60.0%	61,836	5.0	3	1	3	0	0	3
Hawthorne	98	26	3	60.0%	58,102	5.0	1	1	1	0	0	1
Palo Alto	119	29	4	60.0%	58,009	5.0	4	1	4	0	0	4
Indio	96	22	4	60.0%	57,655	5.0	2	1	2	0	0	2
San Leandro	111	26	5	51.1%	56,793	6.0	3	1	3	0	0	3
El Monte	118	34	4	60.0%	56,227	5.0	2	1	2	0	0	2
San Diego	104	44	13	4.1%	55,901	15.7	36	1	36	0	0	0
Compton	106	37	5	40.0%	55,550	7.0	3	1	3	0	0	3
Mission Viejo	100	30	5	55.2%	54,257	5.5	2	1	2	0	0	2
Escondido	110	23	8	28.9%	51,981	8.3	4	1	4	0	0	4
Inglewood	131	40	6	33.5%	44,759	7.4	5	1	5	0	0	5
West Covina	108	25	5	40.0%	43,763	7.0	3	1	3	0	0	3
Ventura	97	29	7	34.5%	40,015	7.7	3	1	3	0	0	3
Napa	104	29	6	40.0%	38,666	7.0	2	1	2	0	0	2
Berkeley	123	36	5	30.0%	38,138	8.0	9	1	9	0	0	9
Santa Clara	106	29	6	30.0%	37,655	8.0	4	1	4	0	0	4
Fairfield	104	33	6	30.0%	34,224	8.0	2	1	2	0	0	2
Chico	110	28	6	30.0%	33,605	8.0	3	1	3	0	0	3
Temecula	110	42	5	23.5%	30,532	8.3	3	1	3	0	0	3
Redwood City	108	31	7	21.0%	24,064	23.8	4	2	4	0	0	2
Vacaville	101	19	9	22.6%	23,771	9.5	2	1	2	0	0	1
Daly City	111	31	9	20.0%	22,880	9.0	2	1	2	0	0	2
Hemet	105	35	7	16.3%	20,952	9.7	3	1	3	0	0	2
Santa Cruz	110	26	9	10.0%	10,405	10.0	4	1	4	0	0	4
Santa Monica	108	33	10	10.6%	10,021	10.4	5	1	5	0	0	1
Orange	108	52	36	0.8%	1,175	38.0	5	1	5	0	0	0

Brooklyn

ZIP	rehabs.com	dbnrc.com	freerehabcenters.org	thechateaurehab.com	caring.com	help.org
11208	5	1	4	3	6	7
11206	5	1	4	3	6	7
11239	5	2	4	3	6	7
11229	5	2	4	1	6	7
11226	5	1	4	2	6	7
11218	5	1	4	2	6	7
11216	5	1	4	22	6	7
11228	5	3	4	23	6	7
11238	2	8	1	19	3	4
11237	2	9	1	20	3	4
11217	5	1	4	3	6	7
11207	2	9	1	20	3	4
11236	5	2	4	3	6	7
11205	5	1	4	22	6	7
11219	5	1	4	3	6	7
11234	5	2	4	1	6	7
11203	5	1	4	2	6	7
11224	5	2	4	1	6	7
11225	5	1	4	2	6	7
11215	5	1	4	3	6	7
11233	5	1	4	3	7	6
11211	2	9	1	20	3	4
11220	5	1	4	23	6	7
11230	5	2	4	1	6	7
11232	5	1	4	2	6	7
11201	5	2	4	23	6	7
11212	5	1	4	3	6	7
11221	5	1	4	2	6	7
11210	5	2	4	1	6	7
11214	5	3	4	2	6	7
11213	5	1	4	3	6	7
11223	5	3	4	1	6	7
11235	5	2	4	1	6	7
11204	5	2	4	3	6	7
11222	5	1	4	3	6	7
11209	5	3	4	23	6	7
11231	5	1	4	3	6	7

Local Competitors

RAW Rankings

Turn This Data Into an Unfair Advantage for Rehabs

Business Intelligence Powered by Local Data

With 100% coverage in the US (32,654 zip-codes) and reporting at the city, state, and national level, you are now equipped to act on relevant business insights instead of average, interpolated, extrapolated, sampled, estimated, and other forms of unreliable data.

Market size
Revenue forecasts
Better business goals

Local, Regional, and National Competitive Landscape

Sales happen locally. In real zip-codes and neighborhoods, not in "states" or in "regions". To help you win local markets and discover opportunities that others miss, we monitor ALL your 11,811 competitors, from EVERY zip-code in USA, no matter how big or small they are.

Benchmark against ANY competitor
Discover trends & emerging players
Identify threats & opportunities

Custom Marketing Plans & Smarter Budgeting

Proprietary population-based metrics such as Visibility or Reach will help you spot business opportunities instantly. Maximize ROI by tailoring your strategy to local target markets, prioritizing and mobilizing resources where they are going to make the most impact.

A/B testing for success strategies
PPC intelligence & lower Google Ads spend
Track progress & organic intelligence

Market Segmentation & Demographic Data-Enrichment

A complete demographic profile of your market, with different levels of granularity (zip-code, city, region, etc.), allows for hyper-personalized communication and marketing campaigns. Monitor competitors, listen to communities and make your business stand out and be a part of the future.

Blend into local communities
Stimulate "in-house" competition
Improve company morale

Our Customers Love This Data, as Will You

Having a tool like this has been a gamechanger!

Knowing exactly where we rank and where the opportunities lie has helped inform action and growth.

Highly recommend SEOlium!

Alex P.

PM, WriteMaps, NZ

As a serious, enterprise-level ecom SEO, I have used EVERY rank tracking tool there is. Sadly, they are mostly all the same, and very unreliable. SEOlium is unique and powerful, and provides truly actionable intelligence, not the same old features you find everywhere. SEOlium is a must-have tool if you’re a serious SEO. Period.

Marty Marion

CEO, Master Positioning, LLC

SEOlium is more than just your average rank tracking tool. The owner goes out of his way to bring features not easily found in the market.
In addition to your standard rank tracking function, you can enjoy its market share and Bulk Import From Google Search Console feature.

Steven Kang

SEO Signals Lab

SEOlium opened my eyes to what is possible.

I now have a clearer picture and they guided me through what I needed to do.

The results have been amazing. Thank you guys.

Adrian Teasdale

CEO, Competitor Monitor, UK

Purchase Options, 30 Days Money Back Guarantee

One-Time Payment

$1,000

Rehabs Data (32,654 zip-codes)

1 keyword (rehab near me)

National/State Overview

City Overview (50 cities)

National/Regional Competitors

Local Competitors

Track Progress (Monthly Reports)

Organic Intelligence

Google Ads Intelligence

Brand Mention Alerts

SERP Domain Emails

Custom Data Filtering & Processing

RAW SQL Database Export

Custom Dashboards

Account Manager

Rising Star

$5,000/mo

Rehabs Data (32,654 zip-codes)

10 Keywords (to be agreed)

National/State Overview

City Overview (1,500 Cities)

National/Regional Competitors

Local Competitors

Track Progress (Monthly Reports)

Organic Intelligence

Google Ads Intelligence

5 Brand Mention Alerts

SERP Domain Emails

Custom Data Filtering & Processing

RAW SQL Database Export

Custom Dashboards

Account Manager

Market Dominator

$10,000/mo

Rehabs Data (32,654 zip-codes)

25 Keywords (to be agreed)

National/State/County Overview

City Overview (25,000+ Cities)

National/Regional Competitors

Local Competitors

Track Progress (Monthly Reports)

Organic Intelligence

Google Ads Intelligence

10 Brand Mention Alerts

SERP Domain Emails

Custom Data Filtering & Processing

RAW SQL Database Export

Custom Dashboards

Account Manager

Rehabs Market Research15 KPIs for Every City & State Delivered Monthly