U.S. states ranked by poverty rate
Compare poverty rates and people below the threshold across all 50 states. Includes the Census poverty universe, 2020–2024 survey period and complete data.
Which states have the highest poverty rates?
Louisiana has the highest point estimate, 18.9%, for 2020–2024. Next are Mississippi (18.9%) and New Mexico (17.8%) .
Louisiana and Mississippi have very close leading point estimates. The small difference should not be presented as evidence that one state’s underlying poverty rate is conclusively higher.
This measure uses people for whom poverty status is determined and the official income thresholds. It is not a household-income ranking, a local cost-of-living-adjusted hardship measure, or the Supplemental Poverty Measure.
- Reference period
- 2020–2024
- Original source
-
U.S. Census Bureau · ACS 2024 five-year detailed tables, B17001
Source published 2026-01-29 - Ordering
- 50 states, highest exact point estimate first; no composite score
- Data and methods reviewed
- September 30, 2026 · data snapshot apd-2026-10-01-r3
Complete 50-state ranking table
Filter the list or change its display order. Positions always refer to the full 50-state ordering. Derived percentages do not have calculated margins of error here; nearby positions are not confirmed statistical ranks.
Showing all 50 states.
| Position | State | Percentage | Count in numerator | Source denominator |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Louisiana | 18.9% | 848,967 | 4,485,706 |
| 2 | Mississippi | 18.9% | 538,793 | 2,851,006 |
| 3 | New Mexico | 17.8% | 370,915 | 2,079,678 |
| 4 | West Virginia | 16.7% | 287,953 | 1,722,907 |
| 5 | Kentucky | 16.1% | 708,321 | 4,409,674 |
| 6 | Arkansas | 16.0% | 473,903 | 2,963,029 |
| 7 | Alabama | 15.6% | 772,360 | 4,944,352 |
| 8 | Oklahoma | 15.3% | 599,071 | 3,906,443 |
| 9 | South Carolina | 14.1% | 725,690 | 5,156,455 |
| 10 | New York | 14.0% | 2,711,742 | 19,362,417 |
| 11 | Texas | 13.8% | 4,074,940 | 29,554,954 |
| 12 | Tennessee | 13.8% | 950,340 | 6,907,625 |
| 13 | Georgia | 13.4% | 1,430,012 | 10,679,691 |
| 14 | Ohio | 13.3% | 1,529,692 | 11,512,055 |
| 15 | Michigan | 13.2% | 1,303,527 | 9,869,514 |
| 16 | North Carolina | 13.0% | 1,360,882 | 10,444,377 |
| 17 | Missouri | 12.6% | 757,180 | 6,020,489 |
| 18 | Florida | 12.6% | 2,759,397 | 21,946,166 |
| 19 | Arizona | 12.5% | 901,451 | 7,220,374 |
| 20 | Nevada | 12.4% | 390,669 | 3,145,745 |
| 21 | Indiana | 12.3% | 821,528 | 6,658,525 |
| 22 | California | 12.0% | 4,632,248 | 38,582,413 |
| 23 | Oregon | 11.9% | 498,380 | 4,173,206 |
| 24 | South Dakota | 11.9% | 104,798 | 878,427 |
| 25 | Illinois | 11.8% | 1,464,937 | 12,405,700 |
| 26 | Pennsylvania | 11.7% | 1,475,496 | 12,600,920 |
| 27 | Montana | 11.5% | 125,642 | 1,091,770 |
| 28 | Kansas | 11.3% | 322,842 | 2,861,130 |
| 29 | Rhode Island | 11.2% | 118,364 | 1,060,352 |
| 30 | Iowa | 11.1% | 344,519 | 3,110,597 |
| 31 | North Dakota | 10.8% | 81,881 | 757,044 |
| 32 | Maine | 10.7% | 144,830 | 1,347,527 |
| 33 | Nebraska | 10.6% | 204,630 | 1,930,184 |
| 34 | Idaho | 10.6% | 199,519 | 1,884,157 |
| 35 | Wisconsin | 10.6% | 610,030 | 5,780,896 |
| 36 | Wyoming | 10.5% | 59,920 | 569,099 |
| 37 | Delaware | 10.4% | 103,819 | 996,908 |
| 38 | Alaska | 10.1% | 72,786 | 717,914 |
| 39 | Vermont | 10.1% | 62,749 | 624,283 |
| 40 | Hawaii | 10.0% | 141,401 | 1,408,357 |
| 41 | Massachusetts | 10.0% | 684,548 | 6,819,072 |
| 42 | Connecticut | 10.0% | 353,604 | 3,530,170 |
| 43 | Washington | 9.9% | 760,577 | 7,680,774 |
| 44 | Virginia | 9.9% | 837,363 | 8,462,722 |
| 45 | New Jersey | 9.7% | 891,891 | 9,180,234 |
| 46 | Maryland | 9.4% | 574,017 | 6,074,976 |
| 47 | Colorado | 9.4% | 542,093 | 5,743,216 |
| 48 | Minnesota | 9.3% | 522,508 | 5,618,351 |
| 49 | Utah | 8.5% | 283,680 | 3,338,083 |
| 50 | New Hampshire | 7.2% | 98,248 | 1,355,300 |
The downloads preserve exact values, IDs, source counts, uncertainty status, source release and original ordering. The CSV is the full 50-state table, including when the on-page filter hides rows.
National benchmark and District of Columbia
The United States value is 12.5%. The District of Columbia value is 15.4%. Both use the same source product as the state table. They do not receive a numbered state position. The national estimate is a source value or an approved calculation from national source counts; it is not an average of the state medians or percentages.
What the lower end of this table means
New Hampshire has the lowest point estimate, 7.2%. The last three entries are Minnesota (9.3%), Utah (8.5%), New Hampshire (7.2%) . This ordering is specific to poverty rate and 2020–2024; it is not a verdict on the state’s overall living conditions.
Poverty uses thresholds rather than a state median
A person’s poverty classification follows the source’s family or unrelated-individual income framework and applicable threshold. The state rate divides classified people below the threshold by the population for whom status is determined. A state’s median household income does not reveal this percentage.
Children and all residents need different denominators
Child poverty describes children under 18 for whom poverty status is determined. It should be reported beside the all-age rate with its own count and universe. Adding child poverty to all-age poverty would double-count children already included in the latter.
Definition, calculation and uncertainty
People below the official poverty threshold as a share of people for whom poverty status is determined. The denominator excludes people outside the poverty-status universe. Official poverty thresholds differ from benefit eligibility rules.
100 × (B17001_002E) / (B17001_001E)
Source component margins of error are retained in the raw evidence. A derived percentage needs an appropriate uncertainty calculation; adding component margins of error would not provide one. This table orders point estimates without statistical rank intervals. Sorting uses full stored precision. Exact equal values share a position; the next position skips the tied places. A missing, suppressed or unavailable estimate would be excluded and identified rather than converted to zero.
Sources and reproducibility
Original source table and documentation · Census guidance on comparing ACS estimates · Population Estimates Program methods .
Editorial ordering release apd-editorial-2026-10-01-r4 uses the unchanged data snapshot apd-2026-10-01-r3. Cite the Census source product, table, 2020–2024, the indicator definition and this page’s snapshot. The retained JSON query makes the inclusion rule, calculation and sort direction explicit. An upstream revision will require a new approved release rather than rewriting this result.