The retirement outlook for Americans today is not what it used to be. People are now working longer and, in some cases, are struggling to save as much money as possible for their retirement after many years of not saving enough. So it’s only natural that if people choose to move to a new city once they retire, they choose a location where they will get the most out of the money they’ve saved.
From cost of living to public hospital rating, WalletHub has released this year’s best and worst cities for retirement.
Unsurprisingly, the top three cities are located in warm climates, however, there were also some other places on the top-10 list that don’t typically fit the generic idea of an ideal retirement destination.
Orlando, Fla. came in first place, followed by Tampa, Fla., and Scottsdale, Ariz., according to WalletHub. Following the top three in fourth through tenth place include Miami, Sioux Falls, S.D., Las Vegas., Cape Coral, Fla., Atlanta., Minneapolis and Los Angeles.
Within the top ten of the best cities for retirement, Scottsdale, Ariz. has the highest percentage of 65 and older population, 21.1%, which is 3.5 times higher than Fontana, Calif., the city with the lowest share of 65+ residents at 6.1%, WalletHub found.
Other cities that were ranked highly for their highest percentage of people 65 and older include Hialeah, Fla.; Cape Coral, Fla.; Honolulu and Port St. Lucie, Fla.
When it comes to health care, Miami has 35.3 home care facilities per 100,000 residents, which is the highest number in the country and 18.2 times higher than in Des Moines, Iowa, the city with the lowest number of home care facilities with 1.94 per 100,000 residents.
Above all, the overall cost of living can sometimes outweigh everything else where retirees are choosing a new city to move to. The cities with the lowest adjusted cost of living include Laredo, Texas, Brownsville, Texas, Jackson, Miss., Memphis, Tenn. and Fort Wayne, Ind., according to WalletHub.
“Too often retirees underestimate costs for health care, taxes, transportation and other critical services,” Angela Antonelli, research professor and executive director of the Center for Retirement Initiatives at Georgetown University’s McCourt School of Public Policy, said to WalletHub. “Retirees will want to look for areas that provide tax and other financial advantages to living there and that will fit within their budget.”
As for the worst cities for retirement, the bottom cities according to WalletHub’s analysis are Providence, R.I.; Worcester, Mass. and Newark, N.J. These three cities were given the lowest rankings due to low scores in categories such as percentage of elderly population, availability of recreational activities and cost of living.
See the full list of best and worst cities for retirement at WalletHub.
Written by Alana Stramowski