In 2023, the population of the Los-Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim metropolitan area in the United States was about 12.8 million people. This is a slight decrease from the 12.87 million people who lived there the previous year.

Chart and table of population level and growth rate for the Los Angeles metro area from 1950 to 2025. United Nations population projections are also included through the year 2035.

Graph and download economic data for Population Estimate, Total, Hispanic or Latino, Two or More Races (5-year estimate) in Los Angeles County, CA (B03002019E006037) from 2009 to 2023 about Los Angeles County, CA; Los Angeles; latino; hispanic; CA; estimate; persons; 5-year; population; and USA.

About this dataset

Context

The dataset presents the median household income across different racial categories in Los Angeles County. It portrays the median household income of the head of household across racial categories (excluding ethnicity) as identified by the Census Bureau. The dataset can be utilized to gain insights into economic disparities and trends and explore the variations in median houshold income for diverse racial categories.

Key observations

Based on our analysis of the distribution of Los Angeles County population by race & ethnicity, the population is predominantly White. This particular racial category constitutes the majority, accounting for 35.43% of the total residents in Los Angeles County. Notably, the median household income for White households is $101,816. Interestingly, despite the White population being the most populous, it is worth noting that Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander households actually reports the highest median household income, with a median income of $107,300. This reveals that, while Whites may be the most numerous in Los Angeles County, Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander households experience greater economic prosperity in terms of median household income.

Content

When available, the data consists of estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) 2019-2023 5-Year Estimates.

Racial categories include:

• White
• Black or African American
• American Indian and Alaska Native
• Asian
• Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander
• Some other race
• Two or more races (multiracial)

Variables / Data Columns

• Race of the head of household: This column presents the self-identified race of the household head, encompassing all relevant racial categories (excluding ethnicity) applicable in Los Angeles County.
• Median household income: Median household income, adjusting for inflation, presented in 2023-inflation-adjusted dollars

Good to know

Margin of Error

Data in the dataset are based on the estimates and are subject to sampling variability and thus a margin of error. Neilsberg Research recommends using caution when presening these estimates in your research.

Custom data

If you do need custom data for any of your research project, report or presentation, you can contact our research staff at research@neilsberg.com for a feasibility of a custom tabulation on a fee-for-service basis.

Inspiration

Neilsberg Research Team curates, analyze and publishes demographics and economic data from a variety of public and proprietary sources, each of which often includes multiple surveys and programs. The large majority of Neilsberg Research aggregated datasets and insights is made available for free download at https://www.neilsberg.com/research/.

Recommended for further research

This dataset is a part of the main dataset for Los Angeles County median household income by race. You can refer the same here

Graph and download economic data for Resident Population in Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim, CA (MSA) (LNAPOP) from 2010 to 2024 about Los Angeles, residents, CA, population, and USA.

In 2023, the real GDP of the Los Angeles metro area amount to around 1.08 trillion U.S. dollars, and increase after 2021. The overall quarterly GDP growth in the United States can be found here. Gross domestic product of Los AngelesWith a population of over 12.8 million inhabitants in 2023, Los Angeles is the second-largest city in America, following only New York. The Los Angeles metro area also ranked second among U.S. metro areas in terms of gross metropolitan product, second again only to New York City metro area, which came in with a GMP of 1.99 trillion U.S. dollars to Los Angeles’ 1.13 trillion U.S. dollars in the fiscal year of 2021. Chicago metro area ranked third with GMP of 757.2 billion U.S. dollars. Additional detailed statistics about GDP in the United States is available here. Despite Los Angeles’ high GDP, L.A. did not do as well as some cities in terms of median household income. Los Angeles ranked 9th with a median household income of 76,135 U.S. dollars annually in 2022. This was slightly higher than the median household income of the United States in 2022, which came in at 74,580 U.S. dollars annually. Located in Southern California, Los Angeles is home to Hollywood, the famous epicenter of the U.S. film and television industries. The United States is one of the leading film markets worldwide, producing 449 films in 2022, many of them produced by Hollywood-based studios. In 2018, movie ticket sales in North America generated over 11.89 billion U.S. dollars in box office revenue. Famous Hollywood actresses earn millions annually, with the best paid, Sofia Vergara, earning 43 million U.S. dollars in 2020. Second on the list was Angelina Jolie with earnings of 35.5 million U.S. dollars.

The Census Bureau (https://www.census.gov/) maintains geographic boundaries for the analysis and mapping of demographic information across the United States. Every 10 years the Census Bureau counts the population of the United States as mandated by Constitution. The Census Bureau releases the results of this county as demographic data with geographic identifiers so that maps and analysis can be performed on the US population. There are little more Census Tracts within Los Angeles County in 2020 Census TIGER/Line Shapefiles, compared to 2010.Created/Updated: Updated on September 2023, to merged Long Beach Breakwater land-based tracts silver polygons into bigger tract 990300 as per 2022 TIGER Line Shapefiles, and to update Santa Catalina Islands and San Clemente Islands tract boundary based on DPW City boundaries (except 599000 tract in Avalon). Updated on Sep 2022 and Dec 2022, to align tract boundary along city boundaries. Created on March 2021. How was this data created? This geographic file was downloaded from Census Bureau website: https://www2.census.gov/geo/tiger/TIGER2020PL/STATE/06_CALIFORNIA/06037/on February, 2021 and customized for LA County. Data Fields:1. CT20 (TRACTCE20): 6-digit census tract number, 2. Label (NAME20): Decimal point census tract number.

Graph and download economic data for Population Estimate, Total, Hispanic or Latino, Two or More Races (5-year estimate) in Orange County, CA (B03002019E006059) from 2009 to 2023 about Orange County, CA; Los Angeles; latino; hispanic; CA; estimate; persons; 5-year; population; and USA.

A Block Group usually covers a contiguous area. Each census tract contains at least one BG, and BGs are uniquely numbered within the census tract. Within the standard census geography hierarchy, BGs never cross state, county, or census tract boundaries but may cross the boundaries of any other geographic entity. There are little more number of Census Block Groups within Los Angeles County in 2020 Census TIGER/Line Shapefiles, compared in 2010.BGs are generally define to contain between 600 to 3,000 people and 240 and 1,200 housing units. BGs are the smallest geographic unit for which the Census Bureau tabulates sample data. Created/Updated: Updated on September 2023, to merged Long Beach Breakwater land-based block group silver polygons into bigger block group 9903000 as per 2022 TIGER Line Shapefiles, and to update Santa Catalina Islands and San Clemente Islands block group boundary based on DPW City boundaries (except 5990002 tract in Avalon). Updated on Sep 2022 and Dec 2022, to align tract boundary along city boundaries.Created on March 2021.How This Data is Created? This geographic file was downloaded from Census Bureau website: https://www2.census.gov/geo/tiger/TIGER2020PL/STATE/06_CALIFORNIA/06037/ on February, 2021 and customized for LA County. Data Fields:1. BG20 (BLKGRPCE20): 7 digit census tracts and block group number, 2. CT20 (TRACTCE20): 6-digit census tract number, 3. Label (NAMELSAD20): Block group number label

This statistic depicts the number of households in Los Angeles, California in 2021, by household income. In that year, there were 210,615 households with an income of 100,000 to 149,999 U.S. dollars.

In terms of population size, the sex ratio in the United States favors females, although the gender gap is remaining stable. In 2010, there were around 5.17 million more women, with the difference projected to decrease to around 3 million by 2027.

Gender ratios by U.S. state In the United States, the resident population was estimated to be around 331.89 million in 2021. The gender distribution of the nation has remained steady for several years, with women accounting for approximately 51.1 percent of the population since 2013. Females outnumbered males in the majority of states across the country in 2020, and there were eleven states where the gender ratio favored men.

Metro areas by population National differences between male and female populations can also be analyzed by metropolitan areas. In general, a metropolitan area is a region with a main city at its center and adjacent communities that are all connected by social and economic factors. The largest metro areas in the U.S. are New York, Los Angeles, and Chicago. In 2019, there were more women than men in all three of those areas, but Jackson, Missouri was the metro area with the highest share of female population.

A dataset listing California counties by population for 2024.

This graph shows the GDP of the Los Angeles metro area in 2022, by industry. In 2022, its GDP amounted to about 1.06 trillion U.S. dollars. About 99.2 billion U.S. dollars were generated by the manufacturing industry. The overall quarterly GDP growth in the United States can be found here.

Gross domestic product of Los Angeles

With a population of over 3.9 million inhabitants in 2011, Los Angeles is the second largest city in America, following only New York. The Los Angeles metro area also ranked second among U.S. metro areas in terms of gross metropolitan product, second again only to New York City metro area, which came in with a GMP of USD 1.287 trillion to Los Angeles’ 755 billion USD in 2011. Chicago metro area ranked third with GMP of 547 billion U.S. dollars. Washington metro area ranked fourth with 434 billion U.S. dollars in 2011. Additional detailed statistics about GDP and GMP in the United States is available here.

Despite Los Angeles’ high GDP, L.A. did not do as well as some cities in terms of median household income. Los Angeles ranked 11th with a median household income of 48,466 U.S. dollars annually in 2013. This was lower than the median household income of the United States in 2013, which came in at 51,939 U.S. dollars annually.

Located in Southern California, Los Angeles is home to Hollywood, the famous epicenter of the U.S. film and television industries. The United States is one of the leading film markets worldwide, producing 817 films in 2011, many of them produced by Hollywood-based studios. In 2012, movie ticket sales in North America generated over 10.8 billion U.S. dollars in box office revenue. Famous Hollywood actresses earn millions annually, with the best paid, Angelina Jolie, earning 33 million U.S. dollars between June 2012 and June 2013. Second on the list was Jennifer Lawrence with earnings of 26 million U.S. dollars.

The Home Owners' Loan Corporation (HOLC) was a U.S. government-sponsored program initiated in the 1930s to evaluate mortgage lending risk. The program resulted in hand-drawn 'security risk' maps intended to grade sections of cities where investment should be focused (greenlined areas) or limited (redlined zones). The security maps have since been widely criticized as being inherently racist and have been associated with high levels of segregation and lower levels of green amenities in cities across the country. Our goal was to explore the potential legacy effects of the HOLC grading practice on birds, their habitat, and the people who may experience them throughout a metropolis where the security risk maps were widely applied, Greater Los Angeles, California (L.A.). We used ground-collected, remotely sensed, and census data and descriptive and predictive modeling approaches to address our goal. Patterns of bird habitat and avian communities strongly aligned with the luxury-effect phenomenon, where green amenities were more robust, and bird communities were more diverse and abundant in the wealthiest parts of L.A. Our analysis also revealed potential legacy effects from the HOLC grading practice. Associations between bird habitat features and avian communities in redlined and greenlined zones were generally stronger than in areas of L.A. that did not experience the HOLC grading, in part because redlined zones, which included some of the poorest locations of L.A., had the highest levels of dense urban conditions, e.g., impervious surface cover. In contrast, greenlined zones, which included some of the city's wealthiest areas, had the highest levels of green amenities, e.g., tree canopy cover. The White population of L.A., which constitutes the highest percentage of a racial or ethnic group in greenlined areas, was aligned with a considerably greater abundance of birds affiliated with natural habitat features (e.g., trees and shrubs). Conversely, the Hispanic or Latino population, which is dominant in redlined zones, was positively related to a significantly greater abundance of synanthropic birds, which are species associated with dense urban conditions. Our results suggest that historical redlining and contemporary patterns of income inequality are associated with distinct avifaunal communities and their habitat, which potentially influence the human experience of these components of biodiversity throughout L.A. Redlined zones and low-income residential areas that were not graded by the HOLC can particularly benefit from deliberate urban greening and habitat enhancement projects, which would likely carry over to benefit birds and humans.

How many incorporated places are registered in the U.S.?

There were 19,502 incorporated places registered in the United States as of July 31, 2019. 16,410 had a population under 10,000 while, in contrast, only 10 cities had a population of one million or more.

Small-town America

Suffice it to say, almost nothing is more idealized in the American imagination than small-town America. When asked where they would prefer to live, 30 percent of Americans reported that they would prefer to live in a small town. Americans tend to prefer small-town living due to a perceived slower pace of life, close-knit communities, and a more affordable cost of living when compared to large cities.

An increasing population

Despite a preference for small-town life, metropolitan areas in the U.S. still see high population figures, with the New York, Los Angeles, and Chicago metro areas being the most populous in the country. Metro and state populations are projected to increase by 2040, so while some may move to small towns to escape city living, those small towns may become more crowded in the upcoming decades.

For source data: https://data.census.gov/table/ACSDP5Y2023.DP02 - field DP02_0068PEFor more information about this dataset, please contact egis@isd.lacounty.gov

For the original data source: https://data.census.gov/table/ACSDP5Y2023.DP02. Layer published for the Equity Explorer, a web experience developed by the LA County CEO Anti-Racism, Diversity, and Inclusion (ARDI) initiative in collaboration with eGIS and ISD. Visit the Equity Explorer to explore educational attainment and other equity related datasets and indices, including the COVID Vulnerability and Recovery Index. High School Graduate or Higher rates for census tracts in LA County from the US Census American Communities Survey (ACS), 2023. Estimates are based on 2020 census tract boundaries, and tracts are joined to 2021 Supervisorial Districts, Service Planning Areas (SPA), and Countywide Statistical Areas (CSA). For more information about this dataset, please contact egis@isd.lacounty.gov.

Data for cities, communities, and City of Los Angeles Council Districts were generated using a small area estimation method which combined the survey data with population benchmark data (2022 population estimates for Los Angeles County) and neighborhood characteristics data (e.g., U.S. Census Bureau, 2017-2021 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates).Living in communities with high rates of violence and crime not only exposes residents to a greater personal risk of injury or death, but it can also render individuals more susceptible to many adverse health outcomes. People who are regularly exposed to violence and crime are more likely to suffer from chronic stress, depression, anxiety, and other mental health conditions. They are also less likely to be able to use their parks and neighborhoods for recreation and physical activity.For more information about the Community Health Profiles Data Initiative, please see the initiative homepage.

20 year Projected Urban Growth scenarios. Base year is 2000. Projected year in this dataset is 2020.

By 2020, most forecasters agree, California will be home to between 43 and 46 million residents-up from 35 million today. Beyond 2020 the size of California's population is less certain. Depending on the composition of the population, and future fertility and migration rates, California's 2050 population could be as little as 50 million or as much as 70 million. One hundred years from now, if present trends continue, California could conceivably have as many as 90 million residents.

Where these future residents will live and work is unclear. For most of the 20th Century, two-thirds of Californians have lived south of the Tehachapi Mountains and west of the San Jacinto Mountains-in that part of the state commonly referred to as Southern California. Yet most of coastal Southern California is already highly urbanized, and there is relatively little vacant land available for new development. More recently, slow-growth policies in Northern California and declining developable land supplies in Southern California are squeezing ever more of the state's population growth into the San Joaquin Valley.

How future Californians will occupy the landscape is also unclear. Over the last fifty years, the state's population has grown increasingly urban. Today, nearly 95 percent of Californians live in metropolitan areas, mostly at densities less than ten persons per acre. Recent growth patterns have strongly favored locations near freeways, most of which where built in the 1950s and 1960s. With few new freeways on the planning horizon, how will California's future growth organize itself in space? By national standards, California's large urban areas are already reasonably dense, and economic theory suggests that densities should increase further as California's urban regions continue to grow. In practice, densities have been rising in some urban counties, but falling in others.

These are important issues as California plans its long-term future. Will California have enough land of the appropriate types and in the right locations to accommodate its projected population growth? Will future population growth consume ever-greater amounts of irreplaceable resource lands and habitat? Will jobs continue decentralizing, pushing out the boundaries of metropolitan areas? Will development densities be sufficient to support mass transit, or will future Californians be stuck in perpetual gridlock? Will urban and resort and recreational growth in the Sierra Nevada and Trinity Mountain regions lead to the over-fragmentation of precious natural habitat? How much water will be needed by California's future industries, farms, and residents, and where will that water be stored? Where should future highway, transit, and high-speed rail facilities and rights-of-way be located? Most of all, how much will all this growth cost, both economically, and in terms of changes in California's quality of life?

Clearly, the more precise our current understanding of how and where California is likely to grow, the sooner and more inexpensively appropriate lands can be acquired for purposes of conservation, recreation, and future facility siting. Similarly, the more clearly future urbanization patterns can be anticipated, the greater our collective ability to undertake sound city, metropolitan, rural, and bioregional planning.

Consider two scenarios for the year 2100. In the first, California's population would grow to 80 million persons and would occupy the landscape at an average density of eight persons per acre, the current statewide urban average. Under this scenario, and assuming that 10% percent of California's future population growth would occur through infill-that is, on existing urban land-California's expanding urban population would consume an additional 5.06 million acres of currently undeveloped land. As an alternative, assume the share of infill development were increased to 30%, and that new population were accommodated at a density of about 12 persons per acre-which is the current average density of the City of Los Angeles. Under this second scenario, California's urban population would consume an additional 2.6 million acres of currently undeveloped land. While both scenarios accommodate the same amount of population growth and generate large increments of additional urban development-indeed, some might say even the second scenario allows far too much growth and development-the second scenario is far kinder to California's unique natural landscape.

This report presents the results of a series of baseline population and urban growth projections for California's 38 urban counties through the year 2100. Presented in map and table form, these projections are based on extrapolations of current population trends and recent urban development trends. The next section, titled Approach, outlines the methodology and data used to develop the various projections. The following section, Baseline Scenario, reviews the projections themselves. A final section, entitled Baseline Impacts, quantitatively assesses the impacts of the baseline projections on wetland, hillside, farmland and habitat loss.

The extinction vortex is a theoretical model describing the process by which extinction risk is elevated in small, isolated populations owing to interactions between environmental, demographic, and genetic factors. However, empirical demonstrations of these interactions have been elusive. We modelled the dynamics of a small mountain lion population isolated by anthropogenic barriers in greater Los Angeles, California, to evaluate the influence of demographic, genetic, and landscape factors on extinction probability. The population exhibited strong survival and reproduction, and the model predicted stable median population growth and a 15% probability of extinction over 50 years in the absence of inbreeding depression. However, our model also predicted the population will lose 40–57% of its heterozygosity in 50 years. When we reduced demographic parameters proportional to reductions documented in another wild population of mountain lions that experienced inbreeding depression, extinction probability rose to 99.7%. Simulating greater landscape connectivity by increasing immigration to greater than or equal to one migrant per generation appears sufficient to largely maintain genetic diversity and reduce extinction probability. We provide empirical support for the central tenet of the extinction vortex as interactions between genetics and demography greatly increased extinction probability relative to the risk from demographic and environmental stochasticity alone. Our modelling approach realistically integrates demographic and genetic data to provide a comprehensive assessment of factors threatening small populations.