Worst Places To Spend Your Golden Years and Where To Retire Instead

Once you reach retirement, your bills start to take on a new meaning. Every dollar of your nest egg is one you can’t spend on traveling the world, buying a boat or even leaving your dang job a few years early. For those of you with plans to relocate in retirement, your biggest concern might be finding a place that’s both affordable and desirable.

That’s why GOBankingRates identified one location in every state that will eat away your savings fast, and one burg that can provide you a welcome respite from unbearable bills.

The study took every city in the United States with a population of at least 25,000 residents, of whom at least 16% are over the age of 65. Those cities were then scored based on their cost of living, their livability score per AreaVibes and how much of the population are senior citizens.

Home values sourced from Zillow’s Home Value Index — an index that uses adjustments for seasonality to give a broader sense of area home values — were also accounted for in the final ranking. Lower values scored higher to reflect the needs of retirees in the housing market.

After combining all of these scores, the study highlighted which city scored the worst in each state — save for Vermont and Alaska, which didn’t have enough cities that fit the criteria — and which had the best combination of livability and low costs.

See which community in your state you should avoid when you’re getting ready to hang it up, and which one might help you live a richer and more fulfilling retirement.

Last updated: Oct. 15, 2020

Alabama

Worst place to retire: Athens

  • Percentage of population over 65: 18

  • Average home value: $172,435

  • Annual expenditures: $42,547

  • Livability score: 66

Where to retire instead: Decatur

  • Percentage of population over 65: 17.8

  • Average home value: $126,373

  • Annual expenditures: $39,048

  • Livability score: 74

Arizona

Worst place to retire: Catalina Foothills

  • Percentage of population over 65: 30.6

  • Average home value: $543,127

  • Annual expenditures: $66,281

  • Livability score: 78

Where to retire instead: Sun City

  • Percentage of population over 65: 75.9

  • Average home value: $212,675

  • Annual expenditures: $48,126

  • Livability score: 75

Arkansas

Worst place to retire: Texarkana

  • Percentage of population over 65: 17.2

  • Average home value: $103,985

  • Annual expenditures: $37,730

  • Livability score: 57

Where to retire instead: Bella Vista

  • Percentage of population over 65: 32.1

  • Average home value: $192,240

  • Annual expenditures: $45,996

  • Livability score: 80

California

Worst place to retire: Beverly Hills

  • Percentage of population over 65: 21.6

  • Average home value: $5,322,834

  • Annual expenditures: $276,989

  • Livability score: 77

Where to retire instead: Roseville

  • Percentage of population over 65: 16.7

  • Average home value: $501,188

  • Annual expenditures: $67,903

  • Livability score: 77

Read: 35 Retirement Planning Mistakes That Waste Your Money

Colorado

Worst place to retire: Littleton

  • Percentage of population over 65: 17.2

  • Average home value: $509,525

  • Annual expenditures: $66,078

  • Livability score: 76

Where to retire instead: Loveland

  • Percentage of population over 65: 18.9

  • Average home value: $385,067

  • Annual expenditures: $58,015

  • Livability score: 77

Connecticut

Worst place to retire: Westport

  • Percentage of population over 65: 16.3

  • Average home value: $1,093,064

  • Annual expenditures: $116,840

  • Livability score: 84

Where to retire instead: Newington

  • Percentage of population over 65: 21.3

  • Average home value: $239,827

  • Annual expenditures: $52,284

  • Livability score: 83

Delaware

Worst place to retire: Milford

  • Percentage of population over 65: 20

  • Average home value: $234,341

  • Annual expenditures: $47,061

  • Livability score: 57

Where to retire instead: Hockessin

  • Percentage of population over 65: 23.6

  • Average home value: $437,261

  • Annual expenditures: $66,433

  • Livability score: 76

Florida

Worst place to retire: Miami Beach

  • Percentage of population over 65: 16.6

  • Average home value: $1,404,117

  • Annual expenditures: $63,897

  • Livability score: 69

Where to retire instead: The Villages

  • Percentage of population over 65: 79.7

  • Average home value: $297,253

  • Annual expenditures: $52,436

  • Livability score: 79

Georgia

Worst place to retire: Snellville

  • Percentage of population over 65: 16.7

  • Average home value: $222,165

  • Annual expenditures: $49,546

  • Livability score: 69

Where to retire instead: Peachtree City

  • Percentage of population over 65: 17.2

  • Average home value: $359,500

  • Annual expenditures: $59,536

  • Livability score: 88

Hawaii

Worst place to retire: Waipahu

  • Percentage of population over 65: 17.6

  • Average home value: $706,318

  • Annual expenditures: $92,296

  • Livability score: 63

Where to retire instead: Urban Honolulu

  • Percentage of population over 65: 19.7

  • Average home value: $977,511

  • Annual expenditures: $89,507

  • Livability score: 69

Idaho

Worst place to retire: Coeur d’Alene

  • Percentage of population over 65: 16.9

  • Average home value: $367,942

  • Annual expenditures: $53,856

  • Livability score: 77

Where to retire instead: Lewiston

  • Percentage of population over 65: 19.7

  • Average home value: $259,887

  • Annual expenditures: $48,227

  • Livability score: 79

Illinois

Worst place to retire: Wilmette

  • Percentage of population over 65: 18.8

  • Average home value: $727,556

  • Annual expenditures: $80,683

  • Livability score: 83

Where to retire instead: Huntley

  • Percentage of population over 65: 31

  • Average home value: $271,615

  • Annual expenditures: $56,747

  • Livability score: 81

Indiana

Worst place to retire: Valparaiso

  • Percentage of population over 65: 17.2

  • Average home value: $243,052

  • Annual expenditures: $50,509

  • Livability score: 86

Where to retire instead: Kokomo

  • Percentage of population over 65: 18.6

  • Average home value: $106,664

  • Annual expenditures: $37,425

  • Livability score: 72

Check Out: The Best Places To Retire in America Are All College Towns

Iowa

Worst place to retire: Bettendorf

  • Percentage of population over 65: 16.3

  • Average home value: $231,899

  • Annual expenditures: $47,010

  • Livability score: 86

Where to retire instead: Burlington

  • Percentage of population over 65: 19.8

  • Average home value: $91,419

  • Annual expenditures: $36,614

  • Livability score: 74

Kansas

Worst place to retire: Topeka

  • Percentage of population over 65: 16.8

  • Average home value: $126,849

  • Annual expenditures: $40,062

  • Livability score: 60

Where to retire instead: Hutchinson

  • Percentage of population over 65: 18.2

  • Average home value: $100,009

  • Annual expenditures: $37,324

  • Livability score: 69

Kentucky

Worst place to retire: Florence

  • Percentage of population over 65: 16.3

  • Average home value: $204,031

  • Annual expenditures: $45,692

  • Livability score: 70

Where to retire instead: Henderson

  • Percentage of population over 65: 17.9

  • Average home value: $122,500

  • Annual expenditures: $41,381

  • Livability score: 86

Louisiana

Worst place to retire: Marrero

  • Percentage of population over 65: 16.5

  • Average home value: $158,922

  • Annual expenditures: $45,032

  • Livability score: 66

Where to retire instead: Metairie

  • Percentage of population over 65: 18.9

  • Average home value: $274,068

  • Annual expenditures: $51,422

  • Livability score: 84

Maine

Worst place to retire: South Portland

  • Percentage of population over 65: 16.3

  • Average home value: $330,699

  • Annual expenditures: $54,059

  • Livability score: 75

Where to retire instead: Lewiston

  • Percentage of population over 65: 18.2

  • Average home value: $164,571

  • Annual expenditures: $43,207

  • Livability score: 71

Maryland

Worst place to retire: Lochearn

  • Percentage of population over 65: 19

  • Average home value: $216,495

  • Annual expenditures: $51,980

  • Livability score: 62

Where to retire instead: Pikesville

  • Percentage of population over 65: 25

  • Average home value: $383,726

  • Annual expenditures: $58,826

  • Livability score: 73

Massachusetts

Worst place to retire: Belmont

  • Percentage of population over 65: 16.7

  • Average home value: $1,217,636

  • Annual expenditures: $105,329

  • Livability score: 89

Where to retire instead: Peabody

  • Percentage of population over 65: 21.7

  • Average home value: $485,563

  • Annual expenditures: $65,723

  • Livability score: 76

Michigan

Worst place to retire: Rochester Hills

  • Percentage of population over 65: 17.7

  • Average home value: $355,307

  • Annual expenditures: $59,079

  • Livability score: 88

Where to retire instead: Livonia

  • Percentage of population over 65: 19.5

  • Average home value: $226,386

  • Annual expenditures: $50,306

  • Livability score: 90

Minnesota

Worst place to retire: Maplewood

  • Percentage of population over 65: 16.2

  • Average home value: $273,074

  • Annual expenditures: $51,777

  • Livability score: 76

Where to retire instead: Bloomington

  • Percentage of population over 65: 19.2

  • Average home value: $309,338

  • Annual expenditures: $53,197

  • Livability score: 84

Mississippi

Worst place to retire: Laurel

  • Percentage of population over 65: 16.1

  • Average home value: $97,318

  • Annual expenditures: $39,048

  • Livability score: 63

Where to retire instead: Brandon

  • Percentage of population over 65: 17.1

  • Average home value: $200,026

  • Annual expenditures: $47,010

  • Livability score: 81

Missouri

Worst place to retire: Cape Girardeau

  • Percentage of population over 65: 16.3

  • Average home value: $139,577

  • Annual expenditures: $41,837

  • Livability score: 69

Where to retire instead: Independence

  • Percentage of population over 65: 17.9

  • Average home value: $132,962

  • Annual expenditures: $42,598

  • Livability score: 75

Montana

Worst place to retire: Helena

  • Percentage of population over 65: 19

  • Average home value: $292,272

  • Annual expenditures: $48,024

  • Livability score: 58

Where to retire instead: Great Falls

  • Percentage of population over 65: 18.1

  • Average home value: $200,165

  • Annual expenditures: $45,793

  • Livability score: 69

Nebraska

Worst place to retire: Columbus

  • Percentage of population over 65: 16.5

  • Average home value: $165,220

  • Annual expenditures: $42,243

  • Livability score: 90

Where to retire instead: Hastings

  • Percentage of population over 65: 17

  • Average home value: $130,052

  • Annual expenditures: $40,265

  • Livability score: 91

Nevada

Worst place to retire: Carson City

  • Percentage of population over 65: 19.6

  • Average home value: $350,985

  • Annual expenditures: $55,682

  • Livability score: 70

Where to retire instead: Pahrump

  • Percentage of population over 65: 32

  • Average home value: $259,199

  • Annual expenditures: $46,148

  • Livability score: 65

Also See: 20 Best Suburbs for Retirees

New Hampshire

Worst place to retire: Portsmouth

  • Percentage of population over 65: 18.1

  • Average home value: $525,657

  • Annual expenditures: $64,709

  • Livability score: 87

Where to retire instead: Keene

  • Percentage of population over 65: 17.4

  • Average home value: $193,104

  • Annual expenditures: $44,576

  • Livability score: 78

New Jersey

Worst place to retire: Princeton

  • Percentage of population over 65: 16.3

  • Average home value: $831,621

  • Annual expenditures: $98,686

  • Livability score: 85

Where to retire instead: Toms River

  • Percentage of population over 65: 18.9

  • Average home value: $247,342

  • Annual expenditures: $53,653

  • Livability score: 73

New Mexico

Worst place to retire: South Valley

  • Percentage of population over 65: 16.1

  • Average home value: $165,010

  • Annual expenditures: $43,409

  • Livability score: 56

Where to retire instead: Alamogordo

  • Percentage of population over 65: 17.4

  • Average home value: $135,883

  • Annual expenditures: $38,288

  • Livability score: 72

New York

Worst place to retire: White Plains

  • Percentage of population over 65: 16.8

  • Average home value: $653,434

  • Annual expenditures: $86,160

  • Livability score: 64

Where to retire instead: West Seneca

  • Percentage of population over 65: 20.5

  • Average home value: $181,341

  • Annual expenditures: $44,525

  • Livability score: 87

North Carolina

Worst place to retire: Salisbury

  • Percentage of population over 65: 17.5

  • Average home value: $163,712

  • Annual expenditures: $43,156

  • Livability score: 58

Where to retire instead: New Bern

  • Percentage of population over 65: 19.8

  • Average home value: $166,314

  • Annual expenditures: $41,533

  • Livability score: 67

North Dakota

Worst place to retire: Jamestown

  • Percentage of population over 65: 18.4

  • Average home value: $167,534

  • Annual expenditures: $41,432

  • Livability score: 79

Where to retire instead: Bismarck

  • Percentage of population over 65: 16.7

  • Average home value: $295,672

  • Annual expenditures: $49,241

  • Livability score: 80

Ohio

Worst place to retire: Garfield Heights

  • Percentage of population over 65: 16.9

  • Average home value: $77,598

  • Annual expenditures: $37,273

  • Livability score: 61

Where to retire instead: Mentor

  • Percentage of population over 65: 21.7

  • Average home value: $206,382

  • Annual expenditures: $45,134

  • Livability score: 92

Oklahoma

Worst place to retire: Ponca City

  • Percentage of population over 65: 17.8

  • Average home value: $71,292

  • Annual expenditures: $38,693

  • Livability score: 66

Where to retire instead: Bartlesville

  • Percentage of population over 65: 18.8

  • Average home value: $110,044

  • Annual expenditures: $40,570

  • Livability score: 80

Oregon

Worst place to retire: McMinnville

  • Percentage of population over 65: 17.7

  • Average home value: $347,544

  • Annual expenditures: $56,747

  • Livability score: 70

Where to retire instead: Grants Pass

  • Percentage of population over 65: 19.3

  • Average home value: $312,808

  • Annual expenditures: $49,698

  • Livability score: 69

Don’t Miss: 20 Amazing Ways To Live Life to the Fullest When You Retire

Pennsylvania

Worst place to retire: Monroeville

  • Percentage of population over 65: 22.4

  • Average home value: $159,636

  • Annual expenditures: $45,286

  • Livability score: 78

Where to retire instead: Bethel Park

  • Percentage of population over 65: 23

  • Average home value: $227,596

  • Annual expenditures: $49,546

  • Livability score: 93

Rhode Island

Worst place to retire: Newport

  • Percentage of population over 65: 17.3

  • Average home value: $584,677

  • Annual expenditures: $68,106

  • Livability score: 68

Where to retire instead: Warwick

  • Percentage of population over 65: 19.8

  • Average home value: $254,390

  • Annual expenditures: $51,473

  • Livability score: 72

South Carolina

Worst place to retire: Myrtle Beach

  • Percentage of population over 65: 20.1

  • Average home value: $264,890

  • Annual expenditures: $43,004

  • Livability score: 60

Where to retire instead: Aiken

  • Percentage of population over 65: 25.9

  • Average home value: $179,207

  • Annual expenditures: $43,460

  • Livability score: 74

South Dakota

Worst place to retire: Rapid City

  • Percentage of population over 65: 17.6

  • Average home value: $213,746

  • Annual expenditures: $47,111

  • Livability score: 69

Where to retire instead: Watertown

  • Percentage of population over 65: 116.8

  • Average home value: $206,744

  • Annual expenditures: $41,533

  • Livability score: 82

Tennessee

Worst place to retire: Morristown

  • Percentage of population over 65: 16.7

  • Average home value: $136,677

  • Annual expenditures: $41,432

  • Livability score: 65

Where to retire instead: Kingsport

  • Percentage of population over 65: 22.9

  • Average home value: $143,468

  • Annual expenditures: $41,482

  • Livability score: 72

Texas

Worst place to retire: Colleyville

  • Percentage of population over 65: 16.2

  • Average home value: $585,773

  • Annual expenditures: $72,772

  • Livability score: 91

Where to retire instead: Georgetown

  • Percentage of population over 65: 29.4

  • Average home value: $325,549

  • Annual expenditures: $54,921

  • Livability score: 86

Utah

Worst place to retire: Murray

  • Percentage of population over 65: 16.2

  • Average home value: $393,884

  • Annual expenditures: $57,254

  • Livability score: 69

Where to retire instead: St. George

  • Percentage of population over 65: 22.1

  • Average home value: $344,886

  • Annual expenditures: $52,538

  • Livability score: 74

Look: 29 Brilliant Retirement Ideas for Any Age

Virginia

Worst place to retire: Petersburg

  • Percentage of population over 65: 16.4

  • Average home value: $132,117

  • Annual expenditures: $40,671

  • Livability score: 61

Where to retire instead: Danville

  • Percentage of population over 65: 20.1

  • Average home value: $86,179

  • Annual expenditures: $36,259

  • Livability score: 85

Washington

Worst place to retire: Walla Walla

  • Percentage of population over 65: 16.5

  • Average home value: $283,169

  • Annual expenditures: $47,314

  • Livability score: 59

Where to retire instead: Longview

  • Percentage of population over 65: 21.2

  • Average home value: $281,551

  • Annual expenditures: $48,886

  • Livability score: 81

West Virginia

Worst place to retire: Charleston

  • Percentage of population over 65: 18

  • Average home value: $118,897

  • Annual expenditures: $39,809

  • Livability score: 63

Where to retire instead: Wheeling

  • Percentage of population over 65: 22.1

  • Average home value: $101,500

  • Annual expenditures: $38,490

  • Livability score: 72

Wisconsin

Worst place to retire: Franklin

  • Percentage of population over 65: 17.2

  • Average home value: $300,955

  • Annual expenditures: $53,704

  • Livability score: 85

Where to retire instead: New Berlin

  • Percentage of population over 65: 21.2

  • Average home value: $310,727

  • Annual expenditures: $54,921

  • Livability score: 88

Wyoming

Worst place to retire: Riverton

  • Percentage of population over 65: 16.1

  • Average home value: $193,893

  • Annual expenditures: $47,162

  • Livability score: 66

Where to retire instead: Sheridan

  • Percentage of population over 65: 18.5

  • Average home value: $282,503

  • Annual expenditures: $49,393

  • Livability score: 82

More From GOBankingRates

Methodology: In order to find the worst places to spend your golden years and where to retire instead, GOBankingRates first found every city in each state that had both a population over 25,000 and a population of people 65 years and older over 16% (the national average) of the total population as sourced from the 2018 American Community Survey conducted by the U.S. Census Bureau. Once these cities were identified for each state, GOBankingRates scored them across the following factors: (1) population over 65 as sourced from the 2018 American Community Survey; (2) percent of total population 65 years and older as sourced from the 2018 American Community Survey; (3) the 2020 average single-family residence Zillow Home Value Index as sourced from Zillow’s housing data through May 2020; (4) annual expenditures for a person 65 and older using the Bureau of Labor Statistic’s consumer expenditure survey for July 2018 through June 2019, which was then factored out for each city using a cost of living index sourced from Sperling’s Best Places; and (5) a livability score out of 100 as sourced from AreaVibes. All factors were then scored and combined with the lowest score being best. Once all scores were tabulated the qualifying city with the highest overall score was deemed that state’s “worst place to spend your golden years” and the city with the lowest score was deemed “where to retire to instead.” For some smaller states, the population requirement was lowered, however, both Alaska and Vermont did not have enough cities to be included in the final list. All data was collected and is up to date as of July 2, 2020.

This article originally appeared on GOBankingRates.com: Worst Places To Spend Your Golden Years and Where To Retire Instead

Advertisement