U.S. states ranked by renter cost burden
See the share of cash-rent households spending at least 30% of income on gross rent in all 50 states. Includes denominator exclusions and severe-burden context.
Where is the share of cost-burdened renters highest?
Florida has the highest point estimate, 60.1%, for 2020–2024. Next are Hawaii (56.7%) and Nevada (55.9%) .
Florida leads this point-estimate ordering, while California has the highest median gross rent. The contrast shows why rent alone cannot describe the share of renters under financial strain.
Gross rent includes estimated utilities. The numerator includes households at exactly 30% and above. The denominator excludes the source’s “not computed” category; it is not every renter household.
- Reference period
- 2020–2024
- Original source
-
U.S. Census Bureau · ACS 2024 five-year detailed tables, B25070
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 | Florida | 60.1% | 1,594,400 | 2,653,280 |
| 2 | Hawaii | 56.7% | 94,926 | 167,511 |
| 3 | Nevada | 55.9% | 254,017 | 454,811 |
| 4 | California | 55.3% | 3,138,319 | 5,673,625 |
| 5 | Louisiana | 54.8% | 280,905 | 512,847 |
| 6 | Colorado | 52.9% | 404,262 | 764,414 |
| 7 | Connecticut | 52.6% | 237,337 | 451,425 |
| 8 | Oregon | 52.5% | 312,174 | 594,861 |
| 9 | Georgia | 52.4% | 676,065 | 1,289,858 |
| 10 | South Carolina | 52.1% | 276,102 | 529,838 |
| 11 | New York | 52.1% | 1,733,205 | 3,327,305 |
| 12 | Massachusetts | 51.8% | 510,471 | 986,190 |
| 13 | Texas | 51.7% | 1,994,428 | 3,855,522 |
| 14 | New Jersey | 51.6% | 622,327 | 1,207,003 |
| 15 | Maryland | 51.5% | 372,433 | 723,345 |
| 16 | Arizona | 51.4% | 447,352 | 869,948 |
| 17 | Mississippi | 51.3% | 149,998 | 292,635 |
| 18 | Michigan | 50.4% | 507,305 | 1,006,424 |
| 19 | New Mexico | 50.2% | 113,043 | 225,224 |
| 20 | Washington | 49.9% | 526,914 | 1,054,973 |
| 21 | Delaware | 49.6% | 50,624 | 102,006 |
| 22 | North Carolina | 48.9% | 638,780 | 1,306,980 |
| 23 | West Virginia | 48.9% | 73,950 | 151,377 |
| 24 | Tennessee | 48.8% | 413,964 | 847,874 |
| 25 | Alabama | 48.8% | 253,158 | 518,718 |
| 26 | Virginia | 48.5% | 497,919 | 1,025,785 |
| 27 | Maine | 48.4% | 67,661 | 139,717 |
| 28 | Vermont | 48.4% | 33,147 | 68,505 |
| 29 | New Hampshire | 48.2% | 69,100 | 143,293 |
| 30 | Pennsylvania | 48.2% | 721,590 | 1,496,561 |
| 31 | Minnesota | 48.1% | 290,600 | 604,069 |
| 32 | Indiana | 48.1% | 355,094 | 738,794 |
| 33 | Rhode Island | 48.0% | 72,880 | 151,947 |
| 34 | Illinois | 47.9% | 737,425 | 1,538,603 |
| 35 | Utah | 47.2% | 149,855 | 317,240 |
| 36 | Idaho | 46.9% | 86,303 | 183,998 |
| 37 | Oklahoma | 46.3% | 222,765 | 481,026 |
| 38 | Ohio | 45.9% | 676,962 | 1,474,800 |
| 39 | Missouri | 45.6% | 336,158 | 737,729 |
| 40 | Kentucky | 45.4% | 232,325 | 511,721 |
| 41 | Nebraska | 45.1% | 111,902 | 248,394 |
| 42 | Arkansas | 44.8% | 159,453 | 356,151 |
| 43 | Montana | 44.8% | 57,163 | 127,725 |
| 44 | Alaska | 44.6% | 36,229 | 81,157 |
| 45 | Iowa | 43.9% | 150,913 | 343,637 |
| 46 | Wisconsin | 43.7% | 327,462 | 749,274 |
| 47 | Kansas | 43.5% | 155,797 | 358,287 |
| 48 | Wyoming | 43.1% | 26,642 | 61,859 |
| 49 | South Dakota | 39.8% | 41,854 | 105,189 |
| 50 | North Dakota | 38.9% | 44,672 | 114,881 |
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 51.1%. The District of Columbia value is 46.6%. 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
North Dakota has the lowest point estimate, 38.9%. The last three entries are Wyoming (43.1%), South Dakota (39.8%), North Dakota (38.9%) . This ordering is specific to renter cost burden and 2020–2024; it is not a verdict on the state’s overall living conditions.
Cost burden relates rent to household income
A lower-rent state can have a high burden share if renter incomes are also lower. Conversely, expensive rent does not guarantee the highest burden percentage. These aggregate figures describe separate state household distributions and cannot identify which individual household needs assistance.
The 50% threshold gives a different view
Severe rent burden uses at least 50% of household income and the same computable-ratio universe. Households above that threshold are already included in the 30% group, so the two categories must not be added. Florida also has a high severe-burden estimate; the companion indicator supplies the counts for a precise comparison.
Definition, calculation and uncertainty
Cash-rent households spending at least 30% of household income on gross rent, among households with a computable ratio. The not-computed group is excluded. Derived uncertainty is not calculated; component margins of error are supplied. This is a five-year estimate, not a point-in-time rent measure.
100 × (B25070_007E + B25070_008E + B25070_009E + B25070_010E) / (B25070_001E − B25070_011E)
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.