Worst Places To Spend Your Golden Years and Where To Retire Instead
Once you reach retirement, money takes on a new meaning. You become keenly attuned to every dollar of your nest egg, balancing things you may have once taken for granted while working, such as traveling, making big purchases, and general expenditures. For those of you with plans to relocate in retirement, your biggest concern might be finding a place that's both affordable and desirable.
Social Security: 20% Cuts to Your Payments May Come Sooner Than Expected
Demand for Gold Is Up: Here's Everything You Need To Know
That's why GOBankingRates identified one location in every state that will eat away your savings fast, and one place 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 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 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.
Alabama
Worst place to retire: Opelika
Percentage of population over 65: 16.4
Average home value: $211,787
Annual expenditures: $42,203
Livability score: 62
Where to retire instead: Huntsville
Percentage of population over 65: 16.4
Average home value: $268,894
Annual expenditures: $40,918
Livability score: 79
Retirement Savings: Experts Say This Magic Number Is the Key -- and It's Not $1 Million
Find Out: 10 Brilliant Ways To Reduce Your Taxes in Retirement
Arizona
Worst place to retire: Scottsdale
Percentage of population over 65: 24.4
Average home value: $890,521
Annual expenditures: $463,375
Livability score: 69
Where to retire instead: Surprise
Percentage of population over 65: 23.1
Average home value: $431,024
Annual expenditures: $49,577
Livability score: 84
Arkansas
Worst place to retire: Texarkana
Percentage of population over 65: 16.9
Average home value: $127,421
Annual expenditures: $35,399
Livability score: 60
Where to retire instead: Bella Vista
Percentage of population over 65: 31.8
Average home value: $284,504
Annual expenditures: $43,154
Livability score: 82
California
Worst place to retire: Beverly Hills
Percentage of population over 65: 22.8
Average home value: $5,926,049
Annual expenditures: $259,876
Livability score: 77
Where to retire instead: Walnut Creek
Percentage of population over 65: 30.4
Average home value: $1,361,645
Annual expenditures: $92,827
Livability score: 79
Social Security: Women Get $354 Per Month Less Than Men -- Here's Why
Colorado
Worst place to retire: Lakewood
Percentage of population over 65: 16.9
Average home value: $634,190
Annual expenditures: $60,758
Livability score: 66
Where to retire instead: Loveland
Percentage of population over 65: 18.9
Average home value: $499,852
Annual expenditures: $54,430
Livability score: 83
Connecticut
Worst place to retire: Norwich
Percentage of population over 65: 17
Average home value: $220,262
Annual expenditures: $44,486
Livability score: 68
Where to retire instead: Newington
Percentage of population over 65: 6,514
Average home value: $293,746
Annual expenditures: $49,054
Livability score: 83
Delaware
Worst place to retire: Middletown
Percentage of population over 65: 18.6
Average home value: $449,668
Annual expenditures: $58,570
Livability score: 73
Where to retire instead: Hockessin
Percentage of population over 65: 23.3
Average home value: $538,879
Annual expenditures: $62,328
Livability score: 82
Social Security: No Matter Your Age, Do Not Claim Benefits Until You Reach This Milestone
Florida
Worst place to retire: Miami Beach
Percentage of population over 65: 16.7
Average home value: $1,974,304
Annual expenditures: $59,950
Livability score: 69
Where to retire instead: The Villages
Percentage of population over 65: 84.2
Average home value: $371,681
Annual expenditures: $49,197
Livability score: 79
Georgia
Worst place to retire: Snellville
Percentage of population over 65: 17
Average home value: $333,332
Annual expenditures: $46,485
Livability score: 70
Where to retire instead: Peachtree City
Percentage of population over 65: 19.1
Average home value: $465,339
Annual expenditures: $55,858
Livability score: 90
Hawaii
Worst place to retire: Kahului
Percentage of population over 65: 17.7
Average home value: $923,041
Annual expenditures: $76,983
Livability score: 64
Where to retire instead: Mililani Town
Percentage of population over 65: 23.2
Average home value: $1,025,374
Annual expenditures: $88,878
Livability score: 73
See: Retirees Confess What They Wish They'd Done With Their Money
Idaho
Worst place to retire: Coeur d'Alene
Percentage of population over 65: 17.4
Average home value: $593,469
Annual expenditures: $50,529
Livability score: 76
Where to retire instead: Lewiston
Percentage of population over 65: 19.4
Average home value: $357,505
Annual expenditures: $45,248
Livability score: 78
Illinois
Worst place to retire: Wilmette
Percentage of population over 65: 20.3
Average home value: $833,464
Annual expenditures: $75,698
Livability score: 81
Where to retire instead: Huntley
Percentage of population over 65: 34
Average home value: $338,278
Annual expenditures: $53,241
Livability score: 83
Indiana
Worst place to retire: Hobart
Percentage of population over 65: 16
Average home value: $203,227
Annual expenditures: $41,108
Livability score: 68
Where to retire instead: Richmond
Percentage of population over 65: 18.7
Average home value: $111.586
Annual expenditures: $32,163
Livability score: 69
See: 10 States That Receive the Most Social Security
Iowa
Worst place to retire: Council Bluffs
Percentage of population over 65: 16.9
Average home value: $168,948
Annual expenditures: $40,252
Livability score: 67
Where to retire instead: Clinton
Percentage of population over 65: 20.5
Average home value: $102,078
Annual expenditures: $35,732
Livability score: 75
Kansas
Worst place to retire: Salina
Percentage of population over 65: 16.8
Average home value: $158,701
Annual expenditures: $36,160
Livability score: 70
Where to retire instead: Hutchinson
Percentage of population over 65: 19.3
Average home value: $118,964
Annual expenditures: $35,018
Livability score: 70
Kentucky
Worst place to retire: Florence
Percentage of population over 65: 16.9
Average home value: $264,268
Annual expenditures: $42,869
Livability score: 69
Where to retire instead: Owensboro
Percentage of population over 65: 18.5
Average home value: $173,124
Annual expenditures: $38,491
Livability score: 73
Read: Expert Says 'Silent Crisis' With Retirement Savings Looms Worldwide -- How To Act Now
Louisiana
Worst place to retire: Marrero
Percentage of population over 65: 18.2
Average home value: $208,359
Annual expenditures: $42,250
Livability score: 65
Where to retire instead: Metairie
Percentage of population over 65: 20
Average home value: $329,005
Annual expenditures: $48,245
Livability score: 82
Maine
Worst place to retire: Bangor
Percentage of population over 65: 17.5
Average home value: $227,557
Annual expenditures: $39,633
Livability score: 72
Where to retire instead: Lewiston
Percentage of population over 65: 18.8
Average home value: $241,105
Annual expenditures: $40,537
Livability score: 70
Maryland
Worst place to retire: Annapolis
Percentage of population over 65: 17.2
Average home value: $556,843
Annual expenditures: $59,759
Livability score: 60
Where to retire instead: Carney
Percentage of population over 65: 24.6
Average home value: $299,866
Annual expenditures: $49,768
Livability score: 70
Also: 7 Affordable Places To Retire If You Love the Great Outdoors
Massachusetts
Worst place to retire: Brookline
Percentage of population over 65: 16
Average home value: $2,245,366
Annual expenditures: $97,442
Livability score: 86
Where to retire instead: Peabody
Percentage of population over 65: 22.6
Average home value: $635,408
Annual expenditures: $61,662
Livability score: 72
Michigan
Worst place to retire: Port Huron
Percentage of population over 65: 16.2
Average home value: $143,284
Annual expenditures: $37,064
Livability score: 61
Where to retire instead: Livonia
Percentage of population over 65: 20.6
Average home value: $274,962
Annual expenditures: $47,198
Livability score: 90
Minnesota
Worst place to retire: Inver Grove Heights
Percentage of population over 65: 16.3
Average home value: $364,669
Annual expenditures: $50,006
Livability score: 77
Where to retire instead: Minnetonka
Percentage of population over 65: 21.3
Average home value: $478,657
Annual expenditures: $54,716
Livability score: 86
More: 10 Jaw-Dropping Stats About the State of Retirement in America
Mississippi
Worst place to retire: Greenville
Percentage of population over 65: 16.3
Average home value: $498,690
Annual expenditures: $33,686
Livability score: 57
Where to retire instead: Brandon
Percentage of population over 65: 17.4
Average home value: $246,676
Annual expenditures: $44,106
Livability score: 86
Missouri
Worst place to retire: Wildwood
Percentage of population over 65: 17.1
Average home value: $485,727
Annual expenditures: $57,618
Livability score: 77
Where to retire instead: Independence
Percentage of population over 65: 18.2
Average home value: $177,820
Annual expenditures: $39,966
Livability score: 71
Montana
Worst place to retire: Butte-Silver Bow
Percentage of population over 65: 18.8
Average home value: $201,614
Annual expenditures: $38,111
Livability score: 50
Where to retire instead: Great Falls
Percentage of population over 65: 19
Average home value: $268,952
Annual expenditures: $42,964
Livability score: 64
Read: 7 Ways Baby Boomers Are Wasting Money in Retirement -- and How To Stop It
Nebraska
Worst place to retire: North Platte
Percentage of population over 65: 17.4
Average home value: $175,817
Annual expenditures: $39,586
Livability score: 72
Where to retire instead: Hastings
Percentage of population over 65: 17.3
Average home value: $157,752
Annual expenditures: $37,778
Livability score: 85
Nevada
Worst place to retire: Carson City
Percentage of population over 65: 20.3
Average home value: $496,808
Annual expenditures: $52,242
Livability score: 71
Where to retire instead: Henderson
Percentage of population over 65: 20.3
Average home value: $491,837
Annual expenditures: $56,000
Livability score: 84
New Hampshire
Worst place to retire: Nashua
Percentage of population over 65: 16.5
Average home value: $448,759
Annual expenditures: $52,860
Livability score: 78
Where to retire instead: Concord
Percentage of population over 65: 17.6
Average home value: $373,854
Annual expenditures: $45,581
Livability score: 82
Learn: Can I Draw Social Security at 62 and Still Work Full Time?
New Jersey
Worst place to retire: Long Branch
Percentage of population over 65: 16.1
Average home value: $561,118
Annual expenditures: $60,330
Livability score: 63
Where to retire instead: Toms River
Percentage of population over 65: 19
Average home value: $356,820
Annual expenditures: $50,339
Livability score: 74
New Mexico
Worst place to retire: South Valley
Percentage of population over 65: 18.2
Average home value: $234,905
Annual expenditures: $40,728
Livability score: 54
Where to retire instead: Alamogordo
Percentage of population over 65: 18.6
Average home value: $163,774
Annual expenditures: $35,922
Livability score: 72
New York
Worst place to retire: Mount Vernon
Percentage of population over 65: 17.9
Average home value: $603,908
Annual expenditures: $70,988
Livability score: 55
Where to retire instead: West Seneca
Percentage of population over 65: 20.9
Average home value: $214,611
Annual expenditures: $41,774
Livability score: 89
Housing Market 2023: Is a Double-Digit Drop in Prices Coming?
North Carolina
Worst place to retire: Salisbury
Percentage of population over 65: 16.9
Average home value: $226,747
Annual expenditures: $40,490
Livability score: 57
Where to retire instead: New Bern
Percentage of population over 65: 22.7
Average home value: $216,934
Annual expenditures: $38,967
Livability score: 62
North Dakota
Worst place to retire: Wahpeton
Percentage of population over 65: 17.3
Average home value: $170,752
Annual expenditures: $37,112
Livability score: 68
Where to retire instead: Jamestown
Percentage of population over 65: 19.3
Average home value: $184,473
Annual expenditures: $38,872
Livability score: 81
Ohio
Worst place to retire: Garfield Heights
Percentage of population over 65: 16.4
Average home value: $116,000
Annual expenditures: $34,971
Livability score: 61
Where to retire instead: Mentor
Percentage of population over 65: 23.1
Average home value: $264,453
Annual expenditures: $42,345
Livability score: 92
$2,000 Quarter? Check Your Pockets Before You Use This 2004 Coin
Oklahoma
Worst place to retire: Yukon
Percentage of population over 65: 16.2
Average home value: $224,744
Annual expenditures: $44,296
Livability score: 80
Where to retire instead: Bartlesville
Percentage of population over 65: 19
Average home value: $151,427
Annual expenditures: $38,063
Livability score: 73
Oregon
Worst place to retire: Woodburn
Percentage of population over 65: 18.1
Average home value: $408,983
Annual expenditures: $48,150
Livability score: 64
Where to retire instead: Lake Oswego
Percentage of population over 65: 21.4
Average home value: $938,237
Annual expenditures: $76,174
Livability score: 84
Pennsylvania
Worst place to retire: Bethlehem
Percentage of population over 65: 17.2
Average home value: $348,295
Annual expenditures: $50,814
Livability score: 75
Where to retire instead: Bethel Park
Percentage of population over 65: 23.3
Average home value: $283,913
Annual expenditures: $46,485
Livability score: 94
Read: 5 Expensive Renovations Homeowners Always Regret
Rhode Island
Worst place to retire: East Providence
Percentage of population over 65: 19.3
Average home value: $348,295
Annual expenditures: $50,814
Livability score: 75
Where to retire instead: Warwick
Percentage of population over 65: 20.9
Average home value: $344,147
Annual expenditures: $48,293
Livability score: 75
South Carolina
Worst place to retire: Spartanburg
Percentage of population over 65: 16.6
Average home value: $188,411
Annual expenditures: $38,158
Livability score: 61
Where to retire instead: Mount Pleasant
Percentage of population over 65: 16.7
Average home value: $690,488
Annual expenditures: $61,329
Livability score: 86
South Dakota
Worst place to retire: Rapid City
Percentage of population over 65: 18.3
Average home value: $301,673
Annual expenditures: $44,201
Livability score: 67
Where to retire instead: Watertown
Percentage of population over 65: 17.8
Average home value: $251,734
Annual expenditures: $38,967
Livability score: 84
I'm a Self-Made Millionaire: These Are the 6 Investments Everyone Should Make During an Economic Downturn
Tennessee
Worst place to retire: Lebanon
Percentage of population over 65: 16.4
Average home value: $413,940
Annual expenditures: $48,340
Livability score: 71
Where to retire instead: Kingsport
Percentage of population over 65: 25
Average home value: $185,975
Annual expenditures: $38,587
Livability score: 67
Texas
Worst place to retire: Galveston
Percentage of population over 65: 17.5
Average home value: $350,806
Annual expenditures: $43,630
Livability score: 67
Where to retire instead: Georgetown
Percentage of population over 65: 28.4
Average home value: $527,914
Annual expenditures: $51,528
Livability score: 81
Utah
Worst place to retire: Holladay
Percentage of population over 65: 17
Average home value: $858,149
Annual expenditures: $64,184
Livability score: 75
Where to retire instead: Saint George
Percentage of population over 65: 23.8
Average home value: $548,516
Annual expenditures: $49,292
Livability score: 76
SNAP Benefits: Can You Use EBT Card/Food Stamps To Purchase Hot Food?
Vermont
Worst place to retire: South Burlington
Percentage of population over 65: 17.4
Average home value: $487,694
Annual expenditures: $52,242
Livability score: 75
Where to retire instead: Bennington
Percentage of population over 65: 27.1
Average home value: $194,031
Annual expenditures: $39,919
Livability score: 70
Virginia
Worst place to retire: Petersburg
Percentage of population over 65: 16.8
Average home value: $172,693
Annual expenditures: $38,158
Livability score: 59
Where to retire instead: Danville
Percentage of population over 65: 20.7
Average home value: $149,267
Annual expenditures: $34,019
Livability score: 74
Washington
Worst place to retire: Lynnwood
Percentage of population over 65: 16.6
Average home value: $792,537
Annual expenditures: $64,993
Livability score: 68
Where to retire instead: Edmonds
Percentage of population over 65: 21.4
Average home value: $947,232
Annual expenditures: $71,273
Livability score: 77
Also: With Student Loan Forgiveness At Risk, Is a 'Forever' Payment Pause Possible?
West Virginia
Worst place to retire: Huntington
Percentage of population over 65: 16.5
Average home value: $98,827
Annual expenditures: $35,018
Livability score: 60
Where to retire instead: Wheeling
Percentage of population over 65: 23.8
Average home value: $120,178
Annual expenditures: $36,112
Livability score: 71
Wisconsin
Worst place to retire: Caledonia
Percentage of population over 65: 18.1
Average home value: $310,602
Annual expenditures: $47,008
Livability score: 73
Where to retire instead: Mount Pleasant
Percentage of population over 65: 23.1
Average home value: $300,111
Annual expenditures: $44,724
Livability score: 85
Wyoming
Worst place to retire: Cheyenne
Percentage of population over 65: 17
Average home value: $351,317
Annual expenditures: $47,389
Livability score: 73
Where to retire instead: Sheridan
Percentage of population over 65: 20.9
Average home value: $343,709
Annual expenditures: $46,342
Livability score: 83
More From GOBankingRates
Jordan Rosenfeld contributed to the reporting for this article.
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 16.0% (the national average) of the total population as sourced from the 2020 American Community Survey conducted by the US 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 2020 American Community Survey; (2) percent of total population 65 years and older as sourced from the 2020 American Community Survey; (3) the 2022 average single family residence Zillow home value index as sourced from Zillow's housing data through March 2022; (4) annual expenditures for a person 65 and older using the Bureau of Labor Statistic's 2020 consumer expenditure survey, 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 states "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, Alaska did not have enough cities to be included in the final list. All data was collected and is up to date as of April 14, 2022.
This article originally appeared on GOBankingRates.com: Worst Places To Spend Your Golden Years and Where To Retire Instead