This data set describes metropolitan areas in the conterminous United States, developed from U.S. Bureau of the Census boundaries of Consolidated Metropolitan Statistical Areas (CMSA) and Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSA), that have been processed to extract the largest contiguous urban area within each MSA or CMSA.

In 2023, the metropolitan area of New York-Newark-Jersey City had the biggest population in the United States. Based on annual estimates from the census, the metropolitan area had around 19.5 million inhabitants, which was a slight decrease from the previous year. The Los Angeles and Chicago metro areas rounded out the top three. What is a metropolitan statistical area? In general, a metropolitan statistical area (MSA) is a core urbanized area with a population of at least 50,000 inhabitants – the smallest MSA is Carson City, with an estimated population of nearly 56,000. The urban area is made bigger by adjacent communities that are socially and economically linked to the center. MSAs are particularly helpful in tracking demographic change over time in large communities and allow officials to see where the largest pockets of inhabitants are in the country. How many MSAs are in the United States? There were 421 metropolitan statistical areas across the U.S. as of July 2021. The largest city in each MSA is designated the principal city and will be the first name in the title. An additional two cities can be added to the title, and these will be listed in population order based on the most recent census. So, in the example of New York-Newark-Jersey City, New York has the highest population, while Jersey City has the lowest. The U.S. Census Bureau conducts an official population count every ten years, and the new count is expected to be announced by the end of 2030.

United States US: Population in Largest City: as % of Urban Population data was reported at 7.020 % in 2017. This records a decrease from the previous number of 7.065 % for 2016. United States US: Population in Largest City: as % of Urban Population data is updated yearly, averaging 8.675 % from Dec 1960 (Median) to 2017, with 58 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 11.200 % in 1960 and a record low of 7.020 % in 2017. United States US: Population in Largest City: as % of Urban Population data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by World Bank. The data is categorized under Global Database’s USA – Table US.World Bank.WDI: Population and Urbanization Statistics. Population in largest city is the percentage of a country's urban population living in that country's largest metropolitan area.; ; United Nations, World Urbanization Prospects.; Weighted average;

VITAL SIGNS INDICATOR Commute Time (T4)

FULL MEASURE NAME Commute time by employment location

LAST UPDATED April 2020

DESCRIPTION Commute time refers to the average number of minutes a commuter spends traveling to work on a typical day. The dataset includes metropolitan area, county, city, and census tract tables by place of residence.

DATA SOURCE U.S. Census Bureau: Decennial Census (1980-2000) - via MTC/ABAG Bay Area Census http://www.bayareacensus.ca.gov/transportation.htm

U.S. Census Bureau: American Community Survey Table B08536 (2018 only; by place of employment) Table B08601 (2018 only; by place of employment) www.api.census.gov

CONTACT INFORMATION vitalsigns.info@bayareametro.gov

METHODOLOGY NOTES (across all datasets for this indicator) For the decennial Census datasets, breakdown of commute times was unavailable by mode; only overall data could be provided on a historical basis.

For the American Community Survey datasets, 1-year rolling average data was used for all metros, region, and county geographic levels, while 5-year rolling average data was used for cities and tracts. This is due to the fact that more localized data is not included in the 1-year dataset across all Bay Area cities. Similarly, modal data is not available for every Bay Area city or census tract, even when the 5-year data is used for those localized geographies.

Regional commute times were calculated by summing aggregate county travel times and dividing by the relevant population; similarly, modal commute time were calculated using aggregate times and dividing by the number of communities choosing that mode for the given geography. Census tract data is not available for tracts with insufficient numbers of residents.

The metropolitan area comparison was performed for the nine-county San Francisco Bay Area in addition to the primary MSAs for the nine other major metropolitan areas.

Population in largest city in United States was reported at 19034018 in 2024, according to the World Bank collection of development indicators, compiled from officially recognized sources. United States - Population in largest city - actual values, historical data, forecasts and projections were sourced from the World Bank on July of 2025.

Population in the largest city (% of urban population) in United States was reported at 6.7011 % in 2024, according to the World Bank collection of development indicators, compiled from officially recognized sources. United States - Population in the largest city - actual values, historical data, forecasts and projections were sourced from the World Bank on July of 2025.

United States US: Population in Largest City data was reported at 18,761,941.000 Person in 2017. This records an increase from the previous number of 18,704,696.000 Person for 2016. United States US: Population in Largest City data is updated yearly, averaging 16,107,057.000 Person from Dec 1960 (Median) to 2017, with 58 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 18,761,941.000 Person in 2017 and a record low of 14,163,521.000 Person in 1960. United States US: Population in Largest City data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by World Bank. The data is categorized under Global Database’s United States – Table US.World Bank.WDI: Population and Urbanization Statistics. Population in largest city is the urban population living in the country's largest metropolitan area.; ; United Nations, World Urbanization Prospects.; ;

Sustainable cities depend on urban forests. City trees -- a pillar of urban forests -- improve our health, clean the air, store CO2, and cool local temperatures. Comparatively less is known about urban forests as ecosystems, particularly their spatial composition, nativity statuses, biodiversity, and tree health. Here, we assembled and standardized a new dataset of N=5,660,237 trees from 63 of the largest US cities. The data comes from tree inventories conducted at the level of cities and/or neighborhoods. Each data sheet includes detailed information on tree location, species, nativity status (whether a tree species is naturally occurring or introduced), health, size, whether it is in a park or urban area, and more (comprising 28 standardized columns per datasheet). This dataset could be analyzed in combination with citizen-science datasets on bird, insect, or plant biodiversity; social and demographic data; or data on the physical environment. Urban forests offer a rare opportunity to intentionally design biodiverse, heterogenous, rich ecosystems. Methods See eLife manuscript for full details. Below, we provide a summary of how the dataset was collected and processed.

Data Acquisition We limited our search to the 150 largest cities in the USA (by census population). To acquire raw data on street tree communities, we used a search protocol on both Google and Google Datasets Search (https://datasetsearch.research.google.com/). We first searched the city name plus each of the following: street trees, city trees, tree inventory, urban forest, and urban canopy (all combinations totaled 20 searches per city, 10 each in Google and Google Datasets Search). We then read the first page of google results and the top 20 results from Google Datasets Search. If the same named city in the wrong state appeared in the results, we redid the 20 searches adding the state name. If no data were found, we contacted a relevant state official via email or phone with an inquiry about their street tree inventory. Datasheets were received and transformed to .csv format (if they were not already in that format). We received data on street trees from 64 cities. One city, El Paso, had data only in summary format and was therefore excluded from analyses.

Data Cleaning All code used is in the zipped folder Data S5 in the eLife publication. Before cleaning the data, we ensured that all reported trees for each city were located within the greater metropolitan area of the city (for certain inventories, many suburbs were reported - some within the greater metropolitan area, others not). First, we renamed all columns in the received .csv sheets, referring to the metadata and according to our standardized definitions (Table S4). To harmonize tree health and condition data across different cities, we inspected metadata from the tree inventories and converted all numeric scores to a descriptive scale including “excellent,” “good”, “fair”, “poor”, “dead”, and “dead/dying”. Some cities included only three points on this scale (e.g., “good”, “poor”, “dead/dying”) while others included five (e.g., “excellent,” “good”, “fair”, “poor”, “dead”). Second, we used pandas in Python (W. McKinney & Others, 2011) to correct typos, non-ASCII characters, variable spellings, date format, units used (we converted all units to metric), address issues, and common name format. In some cases, units were not specified for tree diameter at breast height (DBH) and tree height; we determined the units based on typical sizes for trees of a particular species. Wherever diameter was reported, we assumed it was DBH. We standardized health and condition data across cities, preserving the highest granularity available for each city. For our analysis, we converted this variable to a binary (see section Condition and Health). We created a column called “location_type” to label whether a given tree was growing in the built environment or in green space. All of the changes we made, and decision points, are preserved in Data S9. Third, we checked the scientific names reported using gnr_resolve in the R library taxize (Chamberlain & Szöcs, 2013), with the option Best_match_only set to TRUE (Data S9). Through an iterative process, we manually checked the results and corrected typos in the scientific names until all names were either a perfect match (n=1771 species) or partial match with threshold greater than 0.75 (n=453 species). BGS manually reviewed all partial matches to ensure that they were the correct species name, and then we programmatically corrected these partial matches (for example, Magnolia grandifolia-- which is not a species name of a known tree-- was corrected to Magnolia grandiflora, and Pheonix canariensus was corrected to its proper spelling of Phoenix canariensis). Because many of these tree inventories were crowd-sourced or generated in part through citizen science, such typos and misspellings are to be expected. Some tree inventories reported species by common names only. Therefore, our fourth step in data cleaning was to convert common names to scientific names. We generated a lookup table by summarizing all pairings of common and scientific names in the inventories for which both were reported. We manually reviewed the common to scientific name pairings, confirming that all were correct. Then we programmatically assigned scientific names to all common names (Data S9). Fifth, we assigned native status to each tree through reference to the Biota of North America Project (Kartesz, 2018), which has collected data on all native and non-native species occurrences throughout the US states. Specifically, we determined whether each tree species in a given city was native to that state, not native to that state, or that we did not have enough information to determine nativity (for cases where only the genus was known). Sixth, some cities reported only the street address but not latitude and longitude. For these cities, we used the OpenCageGeocoder (https://opencagedata.com/) to convert addresses to latitude and longitude coordinates (Data S9). OpenCageGeocoder leverages open data and is used by many academic institutions (see https://opencagedata.com/solutions/academia). Seventh, we trimmed each city dataset to include only the standardized columns we identified in Table S4. After each stage of data cleaning, we performed manual spot checking to identify any issues.

Important Note: This item is in mature support as of June 2023 and will retire in December 2025. A new version of this item is available for your use.The layers going from 1:1 to 1:1.5M present the 2010 Census Urbanized Areas (UA) and Urban Clusters (UC). A UA consists of contiguous, densely settled census block groups (BGs) and census blocks that meet minimum population density requirements (1000 people per square mile (ppsm) / 500 ppsm), along with adjacent densely settled census blocks that together encompass a population of at least 50,000 people. A UC consists of contiguous, densely settled census BGs and census blocks that meet minimum population density requirements, along with adjacent densely settled census blocks that together encompass a population of at least 2,500 people, but fewer than 50,000 people. The dataset covers the 50 States plus the District of Columbia within United States. The layer going over 1:1.5M presents the urban areas in the United States derived from the urban areas layer of the Digital Chart of the World (DCW). It provides information about the locations, names, and populations of urbanized areas for conducting geographic analysis on national and large regional scales. To download the data for this layer as a layer package for use in ArcGIS desktop applications, refer to USA Census Urban Areas.

The National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), previously the National Crime Survey (NCS), has been collecting data on personal and household victimization through an ongoing survey of a nationally-representative sample of residential addresses since 1973. The survey is administered by the United States Census Bureau (under the United States Department of Commerce) on behalf of the Bureau of Justice Statistics (under the United States Department of Justice). Occasionally there have been extract or supplement files created from the NCVS and NCS data series. This extract contains two data files, a weighted person-based file, and a weighted incident-based file, which contain the "core" counties within the top 40 National Crime Victimization Survey Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs). Core counties within these MSAs are defined as those self-representing primary sampling units that are common to the MSA definitions determined by the Office of Management and Budget for the 1970-based, 1980-based, and 1990-based sample designs. Each MSA is comprised of only the core counties and not all counties within the MSA. The person-based file contains select household and person variables for all people in NCVS-interviewed households in the core counties of the 40 largest MSAs from January 1979 through December 2004. The incident-based file contains select household, person, and incident variables for persons who reported a violent crime within any of the core counties of the 40 largest MSAs from January 1979 through December 2004. Household, person, and incident information for persons reporting non-violent crime are excluded from this file. The 40 largest MSAs were determined based on the number of household interviews in an MSA.

About this dataset

Context

This list ranks the 1 cities in the Falls Church city, VA by Multi-Racial Some Other Race (SOR) population, as estimated by the United States Census Bureau. It also highlights population changes in each cities over the past five years.

Content

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

• 2019-2023 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates
• 2018-2022 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates
• 2017-2021 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates
• 2016-2020 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates
• 2015-2019 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates

Variables / Data Columns

• Rank by Multi-Racial Other Race Population: This column displays the rank of cities in the Falls Church city, VA by their Multi-Racial Some Other Race (SOR) population, using the most recent ACS data available.
• cities: The cities for which the rank is shown in the previous column.
• Multi-Racial Other Race Population: The Multi-Racial Other Race population of the cities is shown in this column.
• % of Total cities Population: This shows what percentage of the total cities population identifies as Multi-Racial Other Race. Please note that the sum of all percentages may not equal one due to rounding of values.
• % of Total Falls Church city Multi-Racial Other Race Population: This tells us how much of the entire Falls Church city, VA Multi-Racial Other Race population lives in that cities. Please note that the sum of all percentages may not equal one due to rounding of values.
• 5 Year Rank Trend: TThis column displays the rank trend across the last 5 years.

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/.

About this dataset

Context

This list ranks the 1 cities in the Chesapeake city, VA by Multi-Racial American Indian and Alaska Native (AIAN) population, as estimated by the United States Census Bureau. It also highlights population changes in each cities over the past five years.

Content

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

• 2019-2023 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates
• 2018-2022 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates
• 2017-2021 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates
• 2016-2020 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates
• 2015-2019 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates

Variables / Data Columns

• Rank by Multi-Racial Native American Population: This column displays the rank of cities in the Chesapeake city, VA by their Multi-Racial American Indian and Alaska Native (AIAN) population, using the most recent ACS data available.
• cities: The cities for which the rank is shown in the previous column.
• Multi-Racial Native American Population: The Multi-Racial Native American population of the cities is shown in this column.
• % of Total cities Population: This shows what percentage of the total cities population identifies as Multi-Racial Native American. Please note that the sum of all percentages may not equal one due to rounding of values.
• % of Total Chesapeake city Multi-Racial Native American Population: This tells us how much of the entire Chesapeake city, VA Multi-Racial Native American population lives in that cities. Please note that the sum of all percentages may not equal one due to rounding of values.
• 5 Year Rank Trend: TThis column displays the rank trend across the last 5 years.

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/.

Through a cooperative agreement, RTI International worked with the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) to create public-use files of victimization data for the 52 largest metropolitan statistical areas (MSAs) covering the 2000-2015 survey years. The National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) is one of two national indicators of crime in the U.S. Historically, NCVS estimates of crime were not available at the state or local level because, prior to 2016, the NCVS sample was designed to exclusively produce national estimates. It is important to be able to understand victimization and victimization risk at the local level to inform and improve crime prevention efforts, investigation and victim response practices, and the location and mix of victim services. To protect respondent confidentiality, with a few exceptions, subnational identifiers are traditionally not included on NCVS public-use files. Instead, information required to conduct analyses of crime at subnational levels must be accessed through a Federal Statistical Research Data Center (FSRDC) by obtaining Special Sworn Status from the U.S. Census Bureau. To provide a greater number of analysts with access to NCVS subnational data, in 2007 the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) released a public-use file containing person- and incident-level data from 1979-2004 for the "core" counties (i.e., self-representing PSUs) within the 40 largest metropolitan statistical areas (MSAs). To accommodate interest from analysts and other interested parties in updating the file with more recent data, BJS has created public-use files for the 52 largest MSAs covering the 2000-2015 survey years. The 52 MSAs included on these files are those with a 2015 population of 1 million or more persons and an average annual NCVS sample size of at least 250 persons during the period of 2006-2015. While some of the MSAs from these files were also included on the 1979-2004 version, the definitions used to define MSAs are not the same. The 1979-2004 files were based on the "core" counties that were common to the MSA definitions determined by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for the 1970-, 1980-, and 1990-based NCVS sample designs. For the current files (i.e., 2000-2015), MSA definitions are based on the most recent delineation files available from OMB at the time of data collection for each survey year included on the files.

This layer presents the locations of major cities within the United States with populations of approximately 10,000 or greater, state capitals, and the national capital. Major Cities are locations containing population totals from the 2020 Census.The points represent U.S. Census Places polygons sourced from U.S. Census Bureau 2020 TIGER FGDB (National Sub-State). Attribute fields include 2020 total population from the U.S. Census Public Law 94 data that symbolize the city points using these six classifications: Class Population Range 5 2,500 – 9,999 6 10,000 – 49,999 7 50,000 – 99,999 8 100,000 – 249,999 9 250,000 – 499,999 10 500,000 and overThis ready-to-use layer can be used in ArcGIS Pro and in ArcGIS Online and its configurable apps, dashboards, StoryMaps, custom apps, and mobile apps. The data can also be exported for offline workflows. Cite the 'U.S. Census Bureau' when using this data.

Data for the number of: (a) Consulate Generals, (b) International city organizations/networks, and (c) active Sister City relationships in each of the 100 largest metro areas in the United States (in 2019) from 1783-2024. The Main tab has the total for each of the measures of city diplomacy by year. The other tabs have each of the city diplomacy measures by metro area by year. The Graphs tab contains two line graphs depicting the data on the Main tab. The Sources tab contains information about the source data

About this dataset

Context

This list ranks the 1 cities in the St. Louis city, MO by Hispanic White population, as estimated by the United States Census Bureau. It also highlights population changes in each cities over the past five years.

Content

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

• 2019-2023 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates
• 2018-2022 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates
• 2017-2021 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates
• 2016-2020 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates
• 2015-2019 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates

Variables / Data Columns

• Rank by Hispanic White Population: This column displays the rank of cities in the St. Louis city, MO by their Hispanic White population, using the most recent ACS data available.
• cities: The cities for which the rank is shown in the previous column.
• Hispanic White Population: The Hispanic White population of the cities is shown in this column.
• % of Total cities Population: This shows what percentage of the total cities population identifies as Hispanic White. Please note that the sum of all percentages may not equal one due to rounding of values.
• % of Total St. Louis city Hispanic White Population: This tells us how much of the entire St. Louis city, MO Hispanic White population lives in that cities. Please note that the sum of all percentages may not equal one due to rounding of values.
• 5 Year Rank Trend: TThis column displays the rank trend across the last 5 years.

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/.

This tool provides data on exports of goods from major U.S. metropolitan areas, as defined by the Bureau of the Census. These data are based on an Origin of Movement (OM) Zip-code-based series, and are therefore not comparable with an OM state-based series, like that available from TradeStats Express.

Milwaukee is the largest city in the state of Wisconsin and the fifth-largest city in the Midwestern United States. The county seat of Milwaukee County, it is on Lake Michigan's western shore. Ranked by estimated 2014 population, Milwaukee was the 31st largest city in the United States.[7] The city's estimated population in 2015 was 600,155.[8] Milwaukee is the main cultural and economic center of the Milwaukee metropolitan area. It is also part of the larger Milwaukee-Racine-Waukesha combined statistical area, which had an estimated population of 2,026,243 in the 2010 census. Milwaukee is also the second most densely populated metropolitan area in the Midwest, surpassed only by Chicago. View our Open Data Policy by selecting the link below, https://city.milwaukee.gov/ImageLibrary/Groups/cityOpenData/MilwaukeeOpenDataPolicy.pdf

The 2013 Urban Influence Codes form a classification scheme that distinguishes metropolitan counties by population size of their metro area, and nonmetropolitan counties by size of the largest city or town and proximity to metro and micropolitan areas. The standard Office of Management and Budget (OMB) metro and nonmetro categories have been subdivided into two metro and 10 nonmetro categories, resulting in a 12-part county classification. This scheme was originally developed in 1993. This scheme allows researchers to break county data into finer residential groups, beyond metro and nonmetro, particularly for the analysis of trends in nonmetro areas that are related to population density and metro influence.

An update of the Urban Influence Codes is planned for mid-2023.

Content

Data was pulled from a table in the following Wikipedia article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_cities_by_population I used Microsoft Excel's PowerQuery function to pull the table from Wikipedia. Lists each city, its rank (based on 2020 population), some data on its area, and population in both 2020 and 2010.

Living wages are based in US Dollars per hour, assuming 2080 hours worked per year.

In addition, living wage data from http://livingwage.mit.edu I left out the minimum wage from this dataset because it appears the data is somewhat inconsistent, and often falls back on the state minimum where localities can have a higher min wage. I also omitted the poverty wage data because for the most part it seemed to be the same for most areas. One last thing to keep in mind is some cities are grouped up into metropolitan statistical areas, and as a result you will see cities that are near each other have identical data.

Banner image source: https://unsplash.com/photos/wh-7GeXxItI