Cities Rated for Active Lifestyle
anouchka/istockphoto

The Best and Worst Cities for an Active Lifestyle

View Slideshow
Cities Rated for Active Lifestyle
anouchka/istockphoto

The Best Cities to Keep Moving

Each year, Americans' lists of New Years' resolutions are topped by a desire to lose weight and exercise more. Yet nearly all of us fail at those goals. And when it comes to physical fitness, where you live can be part of the challenge. WalletHub studied 100 cities across the country to identify which urban centers best support residents who want to be more active as well as which cities make it easy to take a pass on physical fitness goals. The study is based on 38 key indicators in each city that support an active lifestyle such as average monthly fitness-club fees, the availability of parks and walking trails, weather, and other criteria. Here are the 10 cities that make it easiest to live an active lifestyle, and 10 where it can be the most challenging.

Related: 12 Ways to Work Out at Home and Stay Motivated

Best for Active Lifestyles: Honolulu
anouchka/istockphoto

Best for Active Lifestyle: Honolulu

Rank: 1
Just as it did in last year's study, Honolulu tops the list of cities that are best for an active lifestyle. It claimed the top spot in the study's "Sports and Outdoors" ranking, which is based on such things as availability of sports and fitness facilities, parkland, walking trails, playgrounds, and more. The city also scored No. 1 for the most tennis courts per capita.

Related: The Best of Hawaii on a Budget

Best for Active Lifestyles: Chicago
LeoPatrizi/istockphoto

Best for Active Lifestyle: Chicago

Rank: 2
Despite having a less-than-ideal climate during certain times of the year, Chicago residents remain active. The city tied for first place for most swimming pools per capita and for most playgrounds per capita. It also ranks among the top cities in the country for the number of basketball hoops per capita.

Related: Indoor Pools in All 50 States to Make You Forget It's Winter

Best for Active Lifestyles: San Francisco
DavidCallan/istockphoto

Best for Active Lifestyle: San Francisco

Rank: 3
A city that came in at No. 3 last year as well, San Francisco leads the pack in number of fitness centers per capita, coming in at No. 1, just ahead of New York City and San Diego. Though the cost to participate in a fitness club here may be quite pricey. San Francisco is among the cities with the most expensive monthly fitness club fees.

Related: The Best Hikes in Every State to Get Your Heart Pumping

Best for Active Lifestyles: San Diego
ianmcdonnell/istockphoto

Best for Active Lifestyle: San Diego

Rank: 4
The sunny Southern California city of San Diego has moved up to the No. 4 slot on the WalletHub ranking. Last year, it was No. 9. A coastal city dominated by an outdoors lifestyle, San Diego is among the leading cities in the study for most fitness centers per capita, just behind San Francisco and New York.

New York
Tiago_Fernandez/istockphoto

Best for Active Lifestyle: New York

Rank: 5
A city that was not even among the top 10 last year, the Big Apple is on a roll. It tied for No. 2 with Norfolk, Virginia, and Irvine, California, for most basketball hoops per capita. New York also comes in second for most fitness centers per capita, behind just San Francisco. And notable, it also is among the leading cities for most playgrounds per capita, tying with Chicago and Madison, Wisconsin, for first place in this category. If there's any drawback in New York, it's the cost to join fitness clubs. It is among the highest priced cities in the survey for this factor.

Best for Active Lifestyles: Portland
RyanJLane/istockphoto

Best for Active Lifestyle: Portland

Rank: 6
Falling two slots from its No. 4 rank last year, Portland also comes in sixth this year for the survey's Budget & Participation ranking, which takes into consideration such factors as average monthly fitness club fees, average cost of sports apparel, share of physically inactive adults and intramural leagues per capita.

Related: The Best Bike Trails in All 50 States

Best for Active Lifestyles: Seattle
400tmax/istockphoto

Best for Active Lifestyle: Seattle

Rank: 7
Though it ranks a respectable No. 7 overall, is No. 6 on the survey's Sports & Outdoors ranking,which is based on such factors as basketball hoops per capita, baseball and softball diamonds per capita, and swimming pools per capita. Seattle is 27th in the Budget & Participation category for this year. Perhaps all the rain is putting a damper on physical fitness in the city.

Best for Active Lifestyles: Minneapolis
jimkruger/istockphoto

Best for Active Lifestyle: Minneapolis

Rank: 8
Minneapolis falls two slots this year from No. 6 to No. 8. Though the fact that it ranks as well as it does is admirable given the city's brutally chilly climate come winter. Minneapolis also comes in at No. 8 for the study's Sports & Outdoors ranking.

Related: Best Gym in Every State

Best for Active Lifestyles: Denver
Davel5957/istockphoto

Best for Active Lifestyle: Denver

Rank: 9
Next up is Denver, falling one place from its No. 8 slot last year. Denver's Budget & Participation rank is a stellar No. 3 this year, which means the city scores favorably for such things as monthly fitness club membership fees, cost of tennis court rentals, and number of sporting goods stores per capita.

Best for Active Lifestyles: Washington, D.C.
Bumblee_Dee/istockphoto

Best for Active Lifestyle: Washington, D.C.

Rank: 10
The nation's capital rounds out the top 10 cities where an active lifestyle is entirely within reach. Though this ranking represents a decline from last year's appearance on the list, when Washington came in at No. 7. The country's political mecca ranked No. 5 for most tennis courts per capita. Unfortunately, the city is among the most expensive in the nation this year for monthly fitness club fees.

Related: 20 Spectacular Trails That Used to Be Railroads

Stockton, California
DenisTangneyJr/istockphoto

Worst for Active Lifestyles: Stockton, California

Rank: 91
In addition to ranking among the lowest overall on the index, Stockton is 80 out of 100 for Budget & Participation, meaning it scores poorly for such things as average monthly fitness club fees, average cost of sports apparel and average tennis court rental fees, among other factors.

Worst for Active Lifestyles: Wichita, Kansas
Davel5957/istockphoto

Worst for Active Lifestyles: Wichita, Kansas

Rank: 92
Scoring among the worst in the index once again this year, Wichita (which was No. 94 last year) loses points in particular for having the fewest basketball hoops per capita, a distinction it shares with such cities as Scottsdale, Arizona; Winston-Salem, North Carolina; Irving, Texas; and Gilbert, Arizona. Wichita also comes in at the very bottom of the list, No. 100, in the Sports & Outdoors ranking.

Worst for Active Lifestyles: Garland, Texas
visitgarlandtx/facebook.com

Worst for Active Lifestyles: Garland, Texas

Rank: 93
Though it's No. 93 overall, Garland is a dismal 96 for Budget & Participation. It fares slightly better in the Sports and Outdoors ranking, landing at No. 84, making Garland somewhat of a mixed bag overall. The city was found to have among the fewest fitness centers per capita, along with such cities as San Bernardino, California; North Las Vegas, Nevada; Laredo, Texas; and Newark, New Jersey.

San Bernardino, California
DenisTangneyJr/istockphoto

Worst for Active Lifestyles: San Bernardino, California

Rank: 94
San Bernardino residents face the challenge of living in a city that ranks among those with the fewest fitness centers per capita. It also ranks among the lowest cities on the index in the Sports & Outdoors category.

Worst for Active Lifestyles: Irving, Texas
RobertMayne/istockphoto

Worst for Active Lifestyles: Irving, Texas

Rank: 95
Another Texas city faring particularly poorly on this index, Irving's challenges include having fewest basketball hoops per capita and fewest tennis courts per capita. On the bright side, the city moved up two slots in the ranking from its position last year of No. 97.

Laredo, Texas
DenisTangneyJr/istockphoto

Worst for Active Lifestyles: Laredo, Texas

Rank: 96
Texas dominates the lowest-ranked cities for an active lifestyle this year. In this case, Laredo receives particularly poor marks for having fewer public golf courses per capita than any other city on the index. It's also among the five bottom-ranked cities for the fewest fitness centers per capita.

Worst for Active Lifestyles: Arlington, Texas
aphotostory/istockphoto

Worst for Active Lifestyles: Arlington, Texas

Rank: 97
One more Texas city in the bottom of the index, Arlington comes in at No. 95 for Budget & Participation and fares slightly better for Sports & Outdoors, checking in at the No. 93 slot.

Worst for Active Lifestyles: Bakersfield, California
LPETTET/istockphoto

Worst for Active Lifestyles: Bakersfield, California

Rank: 98
Bakersfield, also sometimes referred to as the oil capital of California, loses points in the study for being among the cities with the fewest public golf courses per capita. The city ranks No. 97 for Sports and Outdoors and No. 88 for Budget & Participation.

Worst for Active Lifestyles: Hialeah, Florida
jmsilva/istockphoto

Worst for Active Lifestyles: Hialeah, Florida

Rank: 99
Inching up one slot from its last place finish in 2019, Hialeah still has a variety of challenges. For instance, it is among the cities with the fewest park playgrounds per capita. It also comes in at No. 98 in the study's Sports and Outdoors ranking and No. 97 for the Budget & Participation category.

Worst for Active Lifestyles: North Las Vegas
Pavliha/istockphoto

Worst for Active Lifestyles: North Las Vegas, Nevada

Rank: 100
Dropping from No. 99 last year to dead last in the current index, North Las Vegas is one of the cities with the fewest fitness centers per capita. It also has the fewest tennis courts per capita. And while last year it was among the cities leading the pack for having the most golf courses per capita, it has disappeared from the top contenders in that category this year.