Finding love can be tough. While nearly 47% of the U.S. adult population is unmarried (never married, divorced, or widowed), according to the U.S. Census Bureau, 57% of single adults aren’t interested in a relationship or casual dating right now.
Finances are often a subject of debate within relationships, especially when it comes to sharing details about balances and transactions with a significant other. For more insight on how Americans share their financial information in a relationship, check out WalletHub’s Financial Secrets Survey.
To help America’s singles find love, WalletHub compared more than 182 U.S. cities across 35 key indicators of dating-friendliness. Our data set ranges from the share of the population that is single to the number of online dating opportunities to the average price for a two-person meal.
“Where you live can have a big impact on your love life – if a city has a high population of singles and is packed with activities that you’ll enjoy, then you’ll have a better chance to meet someone with similar interests and can go on higher-quality dates. In the current economy, a city that minimizes costs through inexpensive restaurants and venues, plus free things to do, is especially attractive.”
Cassandra Happe, WalletHub Analyst
Table of Contents
Main FindingsIn-Depth Look at the Best Cities for SinglesAsk the ExpertsMethodology
Main Findings
Embed on your website
Best Cities for Singles
Overall Rank | City | Total Score | Economics Rank | Fun & Recreation Rank | Dating Opportunities Rank |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | Seattle, WA | 63.88 | 174 | 5 | 3 |
2 | Las Vegas, NV | 63.64 | 115 | 1 | 45 |
3 | Denver, CO | 61.88 | 128 | 19 | 6 |
4 | Atlanta, GA | 61.29 | 140 | 10 | 19 |
5 | Austin, TX | 60.31 | 120 | 17 | 21 |
6 | Reno, NV | 60.19 | 51 | 35 | 10 |
7 | Tampa, FL | 60.17 | 103 | 13 | 46 |
8 | Madison, WI | 60.02 | 94 | 49 | 2 |
9 | Tucson, AZ | 59.97 | 75 | 21 | 31 |
10 | Portland, OR | 59.56 | 170 | 15 | 13 |
11 | Rapid City, SD | 59.50 | 9 | 110 | 5 |
12 | San Francisco, CA | 59.27 | 177 | 4 | 32 |
13 | Cincinnati, OH | 59.17 | 67 | 25 | 34 |
14 | Juneau, AK | 58.87 | 113 | 176 | 1 |
15 | San Diego, CA | 58.85 | 172 | 9 | 28 |
16 | Minneapolis, MN | 58.72 | 118 | 32 | 8 |
17 | Boise, ID | 58.70 | 48 | 39 | 17 |
18 | Pittsburgh, PA | 58.60 | 83 | 24 | 36 |
19 | Honolulu, HI | 58.55 | 161 | 7 | 73 |
20 | Portland, ME | 58.23 | 143 | 30 | 14 |
21 | Burlington, VT | 57.88 | 99 | 82 | 4 |
22 | Chicago, IL | 57.80 | 168 | 8 | 72 |
23 | Orlando, FL | 57.76 | 158 | 2 | 108 |
24 | Fargo, ND | 57.47 | 1 | 161 | 24 |
25 | Colorado Springs, CO | 57.45 | 29 | 34 | 54 |
26 | Phoenix, AZ | 57.29 | 77 | 37 | 27 |
27 | Columbia, SC | 57.12 | 39 | 61 | 26 |
28 | St. Louis, MO | 56.94 | 78 | 28 | 55 |
29 | Los Angeles, CA | 56.66 | 176 | 11 | 39 |
30 | Miami, FL | 56.25 | 180 | 6 | 65 |
31 | Lincoln, NE | 56.13 | 40 | 86 | 22 |
32 | West Valley City, UT | 55.49 | 5 | 169 | 12 |
33 | Salt Lake City, UT | 55.22 | 53 | 53 | 63 |
34 | Columbus, OH | 55.06 | 54 | 42 | 77 |
35 | Missoula, MT | 55.05 | 60 | 111 | 23 |
36 | Cedar Rapids, IA | 54.94 | 16 | 157 | 29 |
37 | Omaha, NE | 54.91 | 21 | 51 | 91 |
38 | Tempe, AZ | 54.90 | 37 | 55 | 83 |
39 | Las Cruces, NM | 54.84 | 64 | 107 | 9 |
40 | Scottsdale, AZ | 54.57 | 102 | 16 | 135 |
41 | Richmond, VA | 54.54 | 87 | 40 | 68 |
42 | Fontana, CA | 54.34 | 114 | 91 | 49 |
43 | Sioux Falls, SD | 54.29 | 6 | 156 | 41 |
44 | Spokane, WA | 54.19 | 101 | 96 | 25 |
45 | Albuquerque, NM | 54.03 | 110 | 36 | 67 |
46 | Rochester, NY | 53.96 | 147 | 80 | 18 |
46 | Casper, WY | 53.96 | 27 | 133 | 42 |
48 | Knoxville, TN | 53.89 | 41 | 83 | 81 |
49 | Charleston, SC | 53.85 | 50 | 20 | 151 |
50 | Jersey City, NJ | 53.76 | 112 | 68 | 38 |
51 | Billings, MT | 53.55 | 24 | 136 | 52 |
52 | Bismarck, ND | 53.55 | 2 | 166 | 86 |
53 | Chandler, AZ | 53.45 | 13 | 71 | 98 |
54 | Salem, OR | 53.30 | 119 | 148 | 7 |
55 | Sacramento, CA | 53.29 | 145 | 27 | 88 |
56 | Fort Lauderdale, FL | 53.25 | 163 | 22 | 95 |
57 | New Orleans, LA | 53.16 | 173 | 14 | 107 |
58 | St. Paul, MN | 53.06 | 93 | 88 | 44 |
59 | Boston, MA | 53.00 | 181 | 18 | 47 |
60 | Houston, TX | 52.95 | 144 | 31 | 82 |
61 | Wichita, KS | 52.90 | 14 | 142 | 64 |
62 | Grand Rapids, MI | 52.83 | 74 | 79 | 89 |
63 | St. Petersburg, FL | 52.75 | 65 | 29 | 139 |
64 | Cleveland, OH | 52.70 | 146 | 60 | 35 |
65 | Tacoma, WA | 52.62 | 141 | 127 | 20 |
66 | Toledo, OH | 52.62 | 82 | 101 | 51 |
67 | Buffalo, NY | 52.60 | 132 | 62 | 48 |
68 | Worcester, MA | 52.53 | 107 | 125 | 33 |
69 | Huntington Beach, CA | 52.50 | 124 | 57 | 76 |
70 | Fayetteville, NC | 52.48 | 100 | 139 | 30 |
71 | Washington, DC | 52.39 | 179 | 12 | 100 |
72 | Des Moines, IA | 52.34 | 28 | 141 | 58 |
73 | Wilmington, DE | 52.25 | 135 | 97 | 11 |
74 | Anchorage, AK | 52.21 | 127 | 64 | 56 |
75 | Manchester, NH | 52.01 | 167 | 117 | 15 |
76 | Oklahoma City, OK | 52.00 | 17 | 72 | 121 |
77 | Lubbock, TX | 51.93 | 3 | 149 | 93 |
78 | Tallahassee, FL | 51.88 | 30 | 121 | 94 |
79 | Cheyenne, WY | 51.87 | 43 | 170 | 50 |
80 | Raleigh, NC | 51.85 | 71 | 44 | 115 |
81 | Springfield, MO | 51.75 | 4 | 130 | 110 |
82 | Philadelphia, PA | 51.75 | 154 | 23 | 120 |
83 | Lexington-Fayette, KY | 51.74 | 92 | 85 | 70 |
84 | Glendale, AZ | 51.74 | 52 | 93 | 90 |
85 | El Paso, TX | 51.72 | 56 | 50 | 122 |
86 | San Jose, CA | 51.70 | 160 | 47 | 57 |
87 | San Antonio, TX | 51.65 | 97 | 45 | 104 |
88 | Nashville, TN | 51.63 | 131 | 26 | 127 |
89 | Nampa, ID | 51.34 | 79 | 137 | 37 |
90 | Ontario, CA | 51.32 | 133 | 128 | 40 |
91 | Mesa, AZ | 51.30 | 31 | 63 | 111 |
92 | New Haven, CT | 51.26 | 125 | 115 | 53 |
93 | San Bernardino, CA | 51.14 | 157 | 109 | 43 |
94 | Milwaukee, WI | 51.08 | 130 | 74 | 69 |
95 | Norfolk, VA | 50.92 | 106 | 94 | 66 |
96 | Modesto, CA | 50.88 | 45 | 105 | 103 |
97 | Corpus Christi, TX | 50.70 | 76 | 116 | 85 |
98 | Fresno, CA | 50.69 | 89 | 99 | 84 |
99 | Aurora, CO | 50.66 | 46 | 132 | 80 |
100 | Providence, RI | 50.63 | 151 | 73 | 79 |
101 | Virginia Beach, VA | 50.57 | 63 | 46 | 143 |
102 | Long Beach, CA | 50.55 | 171 | 33 | 87 |
103 | Nashua, NH | 50.54 | 137 | 123 | 16 |
104 | Dallas, TX | 50.51 | 166 | 38 | 92 |
105 | Tulsa, OK | 50.40 | 22 | 83 | 134 |
106 | Huntsville, AL | 50.34 | 15 | 120 | 133 |
107 | Santa Ana, CA | 50.27 | 142 | 90 | 59 |
108 | Irving, TX | 50.14 | 73 | 155 | 62 |
109 | Indianapolis, IN | 50.07 | 47 | 70 | 136 |
110 | Henderson, NV | 50.05 | 34 | 67 | 132 |
111 | Jacksonville, FL | 49.97 | 59 | 58 | 142 |
112 | Akron, OH | 49.86 | 42 | 153 | 101 |
113 | Riverside, CA | 49.84 | 150 | 78 | 75 |
114 | Louisville, KY | 49.81 | 80 | 52 | 138 |
115 | Gilbert, AZ | 49.76 | 18 | 92 | 128 |
116 | Garden Grove, CA | 49.71 | 136 | 104 | 96 |
117 | Fort Worth, TX | 49.59 | 35 | 54 | 150 |
118 | Oceanside, CA | 49.39 | 139 | 66 | 102 |
119 | North Las Vegas, NV | 49.33 | 95 | 143 | 71 |
120 | Oxnard, CA | 49.21 | 155 | 122 | 60 |
121 | Stockton, CA | 49.19 | 58 | 138 | 105 |
122 | Fort Wayne, IN | 49.17 | 23 | 124 | 131 |
123 | Detroit, MI | 49.16 | 165 | 81 | 61 |
124 | Amarillo, TX | 49.09 | 7 | 147 | 147 |
125 | Kansas City, MO | 49.05 | 72 | 76 | 137 |
126 | Baton Rouge, LA | 49.00 | 96 | 89 | 117 |
127 | Augusta, GA | 48.88 | 117 | 181 | 74 |
128 | Charlotte, NC | 48.75 | 90 | 48 | 149 |
129 | Vancouver, WA | 48.18 | 149 | 113 | 99 |
130 | Birmingham, AL | 48.12 | 108 | 100 | 125 |
131 | Overland Park, KS | 48.04 | 36 | 114 | 144 |
132 | Baltimore, MD | 48.02 | 164 | 43 | 126 |
133 | Bakersfield, CA | 48.01 | 85 | 87 | 141 |
134 | Moreno Valley, CA | 47.78 | 152 | 160 | 78 |
135 | Irvine, CA | 47.73 | 156 | 59 | 118 |
136 | Anaheim, CA | 47.41 | 109 | 69 | 145 |
137 | Gulfport, MS | 47.25 | 86 | 172 | 106 |
138 | Columbus, GA | 47.08 | 61 | 173 | 123 |
139 | Oakland, CA | 47.08 | 175 | 41 | 114 |
140 | Charleston, WV | 47.06 | 66 | 179 | 112 |
141 | Mobile, AL | 46.97 | 32 | 134 | 153 |
142 | Chula Vista, CA | 46.93 | 169 | 103 | 97 |
143 | Huntington, WV | 46.91 | 25 | 167 | 140 |
144 | New York, NY | 46.82 | 182 | 3 | 167 |
145 | Aurora, IL | 46.64 | 123 | 140 | 116 |
146 | Plano, TX | 46.31 | 11 | 77 | 174 |
147 | Newark, NJ | 46.13 | 134 | 108 | 129 |
148 | Arlington, TX | 46.10 | 44 | 112 | 161 |
149 | Chattanooga, TN | 45.87 | 62 | 102 | 166 |
150 | Cape Coral, FL | 45.73 | 55 | 95 | 160 |
151 | Lewiston, ME | 45.66 | 111 | 159 | 109 |
152 | Fremont, CA | 45.46 | 129 | 98 | 146 |
153 | Port St. Lucie, FL | 45.35 | 8 | 165 | 163 |
154 | Laredo, TX | 45.33 | 10 | 150 | 159 |
155 | Santa Clarita, CA | 45.30 | 159 | 129 | 113 |
156 | Newport News, VA | 45.28 | 57 | 152 | 154 |
157 | Fort Smith, AR | 45.19 | 38 | 180 | 119 |
158 | Durham, NC | 44.96 | 20 | 135 | 172 |
159 | Santa Rosa, CA | 44.70 | 178 | 65 | 130 |
160 | Garland, TX | 44.68 | 49 | 151 | 155 |
161 | Greensboro, NC | 44.68 | 70 | 75 | 177 |
162 | Pembroke Pines, FL | 44.34 | 105 | 118 | 158 |
163 | Shreveport, LA | 44.20 | 88 | 168 | 156 |
164 | South Burlington, VT | 43.94 | 26 | 175 | 157 |
165 | Memphis, TN | 43.89 | 81 | 146 | 165 |
166 | Chesapeake, VA | 43.70 | 69 | 144 | 162 |
167 | Peoria, AZ | 43.29 | 19 | 119 | 178 |
168 | Bridgeport, CT | 43.22 | 148 | 158 | 124 |
169 | Montgomery, AL | 43.09 | 33 | 171 | 171 |
170 | Rancho Cucamonga, CA | 42.51 | 126 | 106 | 170 |
171 | Grand Prairie, TX | 42.34 | 84 | 154 | 168 |
172 | Yonkers, NY | 42.23 | 121 | 145 | 169 |
173 | Winston-Salem, NC | 41.86 | 104 | 126 | 176 |
174 | Little Rock, AR | 41.77 | 91 | 177 | 173 |
175 | Hialeah, FL | 41.64 | 153 | 131 | 164 |
176 | Jackson, MS | 41.21 | 98 | 174 | 175 |
177 | Dover, DE | 41.21 | 122 | 178 | 152 |
178 | Pearl City, HI | 41.11 | 138 | 182 | 148 |
179 | Glendale, CA | 40.34 | 162 | 56 | 181 |
180 | Brownsville, TX | 39.62 | 12 | 162 | 182 |
181 | Warwick, RI | 38.53 | 68 | 164 | 180 |
182 | Columbia, MD | 38.32 | 116 | 163 | 179 |
Note: With the exception of “Total Score,” all of the columns in the table above depict the relative rank of that city, where a rank of 1 represents the best conditions for that metric category.
In-Depth Look at the Best Cities for Singles
Seattle, WA
Seattle is the best city overall for singles, offering tons of options when it comes to attractions, restaurants, social clubs and other venues for meeting singles or having a date. It is known for balancing bustling city attractions like the Space Needle and its music scene with plenty of outdoor activities like parks and beaches.
Seattle is one of the fastest-growing large cities in the U.S., and it scores very well on the “Community Well-Being Index,” which measures everything from public health and transportation to access to food and other key community resources. And if you’re looking to meet a partner who’s a good earner, Seattle has one of the highest median annual household incomes in the country, at $70,308 (adjusted for the cost of living). The city’s status as a tech hub helps fuel high local incomes and also leads to plenty of brainiacs in the dating pool.
Even though Seattle is the best city for singles overall, it’s far from the cheapest, with date activities like dining out or going to a movie costing more than in many other cities.
Las Vegas, NV
Las Vegas isn’t just for bachelor parties - it’s also the second-best city for singles to live in, boasting some of the best and most diverse nightlife options in the country as well as a pretty low crime rate relative to other cities. The most prominent activities for dating in Las Vegas tend to be those that draw large crowds - for example, the city has the second-most music festivals among the cities studied. It has the fifth-most attractions overall, too.
For those who like to drink, you’ll be pleasantly surprised to find out that Las Vegas has one of the lowest average beer prices in the U.S. One good date idea is a trip to the theater - the price of two tickets is among the lowest in the nation.
If you fall in love with the city as much as with your partner, maybe you’ll even get hitched by an Elvis impersonator.
Denver, CO
The third-best city for singles in the U.S. is Denver, the Mile High City, which is a great option for singles looking for a partner who’s fit. The city is known for its proximity to the Rocky Mountains, but it also offers plenty of ways to stay in shape within its limits, with a large number of parks and fitness centers, plus good walkability.
Denver is a good city for online and mobile dating, with over 90% of the population having a broadband internet connection and a smartphone. Dating apps gained a boost in popularity during the COVID-19 pandemic and remain a common way for singles to find love. While breathing in the fresh mountain air in Denver, you might just find someone who takes your breath away.
% of Singles
Highest
- 1. Burlington, VT
- 2. Detroit, MI
- 3. Cleveland, OH
- 4. New Haven, CT
- 5. Rochester, NY
Lowest
- 178. Chesapeake, VA
- 179. Peoria, AZ
- 180. Plano, TX
- 181. Gilbert, AZ
- 182. Fremont, CA
Best City vs. Worst City: 2x Difference
Burlington, VT vs. Fremont, CA
Singles Gender Balance
Highest
- 1. Salem, OR
- 2. Lincoln, NE
- 3. Columbia, SC
- 4. San Jose, CA
- 5. Irving, TX
Lowest
- 178. Durham, NC
- 179. Dover, DE
- 180. Greensboro, NC
- 181. Columbia, MD
- 182. Jackson, MS
Online-Dating Opportunities
Most
- 1. Gilbert, AZ
- 2. Plano, TX
- 3. Irvine, CA
- 4. Fremont, CA
- 5. Santa Clarita, CA
Fewest
- 178. Cleveland, OH
- 179. Newark, NJ
- 180. Miami, FL
- 181. Huntington, WV
- 182. Brownsville, TX
Nightlife Options per Capita
Most
- T-1. Las Vegas, NV
- T-1. San Francisco, CA
- T-1. New Orleans, LA
- 4. Chicago, IL
- 5. Orlando, FL
Fewest
- 177. Ontario, CA
- 178. Garland, TX
- 179. Garden Grove, CA
- 180. Columbia, MD
- 181. Moreno Valley, CA
Restaurant-Meal Costs
Lowest
- 1. Amarillo, TX
- 2. Glendale, AZ
- T-3. El Paso, TX
- T-3. Las Cruces, NM
- T-5. Henderson, NV
- T-5. Lubbock, TX
Highest
- T-170. New York, NY
- T-170. San Francisco, CA
- T-170. Seattle, WA
- T-170. Miami, FL
- T-170. Irvine, CA
- T-170. Santa Rosa, CA
Best City vs. Worst City: 3x Difference
Amarillo, TX vs. New York, NY
Avg. Beer & Wine Price
Lowest
- 1. Brownsville, TX
- 2. Gulfport, MS
- 3. Fresno, CA
- 4. Reno, NV
- 5. Indianapolis, IN
Highest
- 178. Juneau, AK
- T-179. Manchester, NH
- T-179. Nashua, NH
- 181. New York, NY
- 182. Seattle, WA
Movie Costs
Lowest
- 1. Fargo, ND
- 2. Montgomery, AL
- 3. Corpus Christi, TX
- 4. Port St. Lucie, FL
- 5. Oklahoma City, OK
Highest
- T-176. Chula Vista, CA
- T-176. Oceanside, CA
- 179. New York, NY
- T-180. Los Angeles, CA
- T-180. Long Beach, CA
- 182. Oxnard, CA
Best City vs. Worst City: 3x Difference
Fargo, ND vs. Oxnard, CA
Beauty Salon Costs
Lowest
- 1. Brownsville, TX
- 2. El Paso, TX
- 3. Omaha, NE
- T-4. Tampa, FL
- T-4. St. Petersburg, FL
Highest
- T-177. Los Angeles, CA
- T-177. Long Beach, CA
- 179. Fremont, CA
- 180. Louisville, KY
- 181. Oxnard, CA
- 182. San Francisco, CA
Best City vs. Worst City: 3x Difference
Brownsville, TX vs. San Francisco, CA
Rent for One-Bedroom Apartment (Adj by Median Annual Household Income)
Lowest
- 1. Columbia, MD
- 2. Cedar Rapids, IA
- 3. Overland Park, KS
- 4. Cheyenne, WY
- 5. Bismarck, ND
Highest
- 178. Baltimore, MD
- T-179. Miami, FL
- T-179. Hialeah, FL
- 181. Boston, MA
- 182. New York, NY
Best City vs. Worst City: 3x Difference
Columbia, MD vs. New York, NY
Show More
Ask the Experts
The dating scene in each city is unique. In every situation, cost and budget will play a key role in your dating experience. We therefore turned to a panel of experts for advice on money, what makes a good city for singles and how to draw singles to those areas. Click on the experts’ profiles to read their bios and thoughts on the following key questions:
- With the rise of dating apps and therefore dates, what financial advice do you have targeted to singles on a budget?
- What should singles be looking for when choosing a city?
- Do you think virtual dating is a viable option for single people to save money and safely enjoy dating at the same time?
- When evaluating the best cities for singles, what are the top five indicators?
- Should local authorities work to make cities more attractive to singles? If so, how?
Ask the Experts
Jennie Rosier
Ph.D. – Associate Professor, School of Communication Studies – James Madison University
Read More
Joseph Schwartz
Ph.D. – Teaching Professor, Department of Communication Studies – Northeastern University
Read More
Alexandra E. Black
Ph.D. - Visiting Teaching Assistant Professor, Psychology Department – University of Pittsburgh
Read More
Methodology
In order to determine the best cities for singles, WalletHub compared 182 cities — including the 150 most populated U.S. cities, plus at least two of the most populated cities in each state — across three key dimensions: 1) Economics, 2) Fun & Recreation and 3) Dating Opportunities.
We evaluated those dimensions using 35 relevant metrics, which are listed below with their corresponding weights. Each metric was graded on a 100-point scale, with a score of 100 representing the most favorable conditions for singles. For metrics marked with an asterisk (*), we calculated the population size using the square root of the population in order to avoid overcompensating for minor differences across cities.
Finally, we determined each city’s weighted average across all metrics to calculate its overall score and used the resulting scores to rank-order our sample. In determining our sample, we considered only the city proper in each case, excluding cities in the surrounding metro area.
Economics – Total Points: 25
- Restaurant-Meal Costs: Full Weight (~1.56 Points)
- Average Beer & Wine Price: Full Weight (~1.56 Points)
- Average co*cktail Price: Full Weight (~1.56 Points)
- Average Price for Two-Person Meal: Full Weight (~1.56 Points)
Note: This metric measures the average price of a basic two-person dinner in a neighborhood pub. - Movie Costs: Full Weight (~1.56 Points)
- Average Price for Two Tickets to the Theater: Full Weight (~1.56 Points)
- Taxi-Fare Cost: Full Weight (~1.56 Points)
- Beauty-Salon Costs: Full Weight (~1.56 Points)
- Haircut Costs: Full Weight (~1.56 Points)
- Average Price per Party Ticket: Full Weight (~1.56 Points)
- Average Monthly Fitness-Club Fee: Full Weight (~1.56 Points)
- Median Annual Household Income: Full Weight (~1.56 Points)
Note: This metric was adjusted by the cost of living. - Housing Affordability: Full Weight (~1.56 Points)
Note: This metric was measured using the rent of a one-bedroom apartment (adjusted by the median annual household income). - Job Growth Rate: Full Weight (~1.56 Points)
- Unemployment Rate: Full Weight (~1.56 Points)
- Sharecare’s Community Well-Being Index Score: Full Weight (~1.56 Points)
Note: This metric is based on Sharecare’s Community Well-Being Index, which is a comprehensive measure that evaluates health risk across ten domains, five that represent individual well-being and five that contextualize the social determinants of health.
Fun & Recreation – Total Points: 25
- Number of Attractions: Full Weight (~1.79 Points)
Note: “Attractions” include, for instance, museums, cultural performances and zoos. - Restaurants per Capita*: Full Weight (~1.79 Points)
- Coffee & Tea Shops per Capita*: Full Weight (~1.79 Points)
- Parks per Capita*: Full Weight (~1.79 Points)
- Nightlife Options per Capita*: Full Weight (~1.79 Points)
- Shopping Centers per Capita*: Full Weight (~1.79 Points)
- Wellness Centers & Spas per Capita*: Full Weight (~1.79 Points)
- Fitness Centers per Capita*: Full Weight (~1.79 Points)
- Social Clubs per Capita*: Full Weight (~1.79 Points)
- Presence of Music Festivals: Full Weight (~1.79 Points)
Note: This binary metric considers the presence of music festivals in each city. The cities that have music festivals receive 1, the others receive 0. In case a city has more than one music festival, it receives the exact number of music festivals it hosts. - City Accessibility: Full Weight (~1.79 Points)
- Walkability: Full Weight (~1.79 Points)
- Weather: Full Weight (~1.79 Points)
Note: This metric is based on WalletHub “” ranking. - Safety: Full Weight (~1.79 Points)
Dating Opportunities – Total Points: 50
- Share of Single Population: Double Weight (~12.50 Points)
- Singles Gender Balance: Double Weight (~12.50 Points)
- Online Dating Opportunities: Full Weight (~6.25 Points)
Note: This metric measures the share of households with a broadband connection. - Mobile Dating Opportunities: Full Weight (~6.25 Points)
Note: This metric measures the share of adults who own a smartphone. - Google Search Traffic for the Term “Tinder”: Double Weight (~12.50 Points)
Note: This metric was used as a proxy for the cities that search Tinder the most.
Sources: Data used to create this ranking were collected from the U.S. Census Bureau, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Council for Community and Economic Research, Numbeo, Esri's Updated Demographics - 2023 estimates (Market Potential: GfK MRI), U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, The Trust for Public Land, Yelp, TripAdvisor, Walk Score, Sharecare’s Community Well-Being Index, Expatistan, Google Trends, Eventbrite, Music Festival Wizard and WalletHub research.