2018’s Best Places to Find a Job

With 2017 behind us, it’s time to think about fresh starts again. But whether that means a small change or a complete life overhaul, finding a new or better job will be a top resolution.

If that’s your mission for the new year, it’s a good time to be on the job market. According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics’ most recent jobs report, the national unemployment rate has fallen to a 17-year low of 4.1 percent while hiring is up.

College graduates, especially, will see a strong boost in their job prospects. According to the National Association of Colleges and Employers, employers plan to hire 4 percent more members from the Class of 2018 than from the previous graduating cohort.

But your luck of finding work depends largely on location. To help you with the job hunt, WalletHub compared more than 180 U.S. cities across 26 key indicators of job-market strength. They range from job opportunities to employment growth to monthly average starting salary. Read on for our findings, additional insight from our panel of experts and a full description of our methodology.

Main Findings

Best Places to Find a Job

Overall Rank (1 = Best)	City	Total Score	‘Job Market’ Rank	‘Socio-economics’ Rank
1	Chandler, AZ	67.66	3	9
2	Scottsdale, AZ	66.29	5	3
3	San Francisco, CA	66.06	2	43
4	Peoria, AZ	65.86	1	56
5	Gilbert, AZ	65.35	4	34
6	Plano, TX	64.69	6	16
7	Portland, ME	63.06	10	12
8	Irvine, CA	62.86	11	13
9	Madison, WI	62.44	21	1
10	Boston, MA	62.37	7	42
11	Austin, TX	62.29	12	25
12	Fargo, ND	62.10	14	18
13	Orlando, FL	61.98	9	36
14	Bismarck, ND	61.61	13	39
15	Columbia, MD	61.28	30	4
16	Tampa, FL	60.78	18	22
17	Seattle, WA	60.70	28	11
18	Salt Lake City, UT	60.65	17	28
19	Fremont, CA	60.04	15	66
20	Tempe, AZ	59.79	32	15
21	Charleston, SC	59.67	24	38
22	Manchester, NH	59.52	19	55
23	Irving, TX	59.44	8	122
24	Minneapolis, MN	59.38	58	2
25	Denver, CO	59.32	35	17
26	Overland Park, KS	59.26	45	10
27	Nashua, NH	58.85	29	48
28	Atlanta, GA	58.78	26	54
29	Boise, ID	58.62	67	5
30	San Diego, CA	58.55	43	19
31	Des Moines, IA	58.42	37	29
32	Huntington Beach, CA	58.27	40	30
32	San Jose, CA	58.16	31	59
34	Rancho Cucamonga, CA	58.13	50	27
35	Omaha, NE	58.06	53	23
36	Lincoln, NE	57.99	74	8
37	South Burlington, VT	57.91	38	44
38	Grand Prairie, TX	57.89	27	85
39	Amarillo, TX	57.60	20	112
40	Portland, OR	57.55	59	26
41	Sacramento, CA	57.51	55	33
42	Honolulu, HI	57.51	44	46
43	Grand Rapids, MI	57.32	52	40
44	St. Paul, MN	57.28	72	14
45	Pittsburgh, PA	57.24	81	7
46	St. Petersburg, FL	57.20	41	58
47	Colorado Springs, CO	57.03	68	24
48	Garland, TX	57.03	16	147
49	Dallas, TX	56.96	22	135
50	Santa Clarita, CA	56.92	36	90
51	Washington, DC	56.77	47	65
52	West Valley City, UT	56.76	64	35
53	Salem, OR	56.64	39	86
54	Virginia Beach, VA	56.45	75	20
55	Pearl City, HI	56.41	25	124
56	Mesa, AZ	56.25	48	83
57	Little Rock, AR	56.12	23	160
58	Aurora, CO	55.93	33	129
59	San Antonio, TX	55.83	49	94
60	Los Angeles, CA	55.80	46	98
61	Phoenix, AZ	55.47	65	75
62	Lewiston, ME	55.37	42	126
63	Sioux Falls, SD	55.33	87	21
64	Garden Grove, CA	55.20	85	32
65	Raleigh, NC	55.12	78	51
66	Fort Smith, AR	54.87	34	157
67	Cincinnati, OH	54.77	86	45
68	Charlotte, NC	54.64	76	69
69	Burlington, VT	54.59	102	6
70	Glendale, CA	54.58	66	105
71	Cedar Rapids, IA	54.58	84	52
72	Fort Lauderdale, FL	54.42	56	141
73	Columbus, OH	54.29	92	31
74	Long Beach, CA	54.18	61	125
75	Nashville, TN	54.16	70	103
76	Jacksonville, FL	54.07	69	110
77	Oceanside, CA	54.06	71	114
78	Wilmington, DE	54.01	83	70
79	Lubbock, TX	53.99	54	139
80	Tacoma, WA	53.97	80	89
81	Glendale, AZ	53.94	62	130
82	Santa Rosa, CA	53.88	82	81
83	Arlington, TX	53.87	60	143
84	Ontario, CA	53.76	62	144
85	Miami, FL	53.47	51	163
86	Anaheim, CA	53.46	77	109
87	Fort Worth, TX	53.40	73	123
88	Chattanooga, TN	53.34	57	168
89	Columbia, SC	53.06	95	47
90	Santa Ana, CA	52.89	79	127
91	Chesapeake, VA	52.85	94	61
92	Reno, NV	52.62	97	60
93	Cape Coral, FL	52.39	88	107
94	Kansas City, MO	52.15	89	104
95	Rapid City, SD	51.92	103	72
96	Durham, NC	51.82	91	113
97	Richmond, VA	51.71	101	84
98	St. Louis, MO	51.26	93	120
99	Warwick, RI	51.02	120	50
100	Fontana, CA	50.96	104	106
101	Knoxville, TN	50.91	99	117
102	Tucson, AZ	50.82	112	79
103	Newport News, VA	50.78	108	97
104	Jersey City, NJ	50.73	126	49
105	New York, NY	50.72	110	91
106	Tallahassee, FL	50.63	121	67
107	El Paso, TX	50.62	109	96
108	Milwaukee, WI	50.56	106	115
109	Port St. Lucie, FL	50.48	107	111
110	Lexington-Fayette, KY	50.47	129	57
111	Riverside, CA	50.47	100	131
112	Vancouver, WA	50.40	111	99
113	Billings, MT	50.17	113	100
114	Charleston, WV	50.00	98	150
115	Wichita, KS	49.96	96	149
116	Philadelphia, PA	49.84	105	146
117	Spokane, WA	49.73	124	87
118	Worcester, MA	49.62	128	78
119	Pembroke Pines, FL	49.61	118	108
120	Houston, TX	49.53	116	116
121	Oakland, CA	49.51	90	173
122	Louisville, KY	49.42	122	95
123	Aurora, IL	49.39	144	41
124	Nampa, ID	49.26	115	136
125	Dover, DE	49.17	125	101
126	Las Vegas, NV	49.13	143	53
127	Juneau, AK	49.08	130	93
128	Cheyenne, WY	49.03	132	92
129	Henderson, NV	48.83	139	74
130	Chula Vista, CA	48.65	114	148
131	Yonkers, NY	48.56	142	71
132	Buffalo, NY	48.49	146	63
133	Chicago, IL	48.32	153	37
134	Norfolk, VA	48.25	127	132
135	Albuquerque, NM	48.20	135	118
136	Fort Wayne, IN	48.05	133	119
137	Missoula, MT	48.01	147	62
138	Springfield, MO	47.63	123	153
139	Corpus Christi, TX	47.54	117	156
140	Modesto, CA	47.51	137	134
141	Bridgeport, CT	47.14	149	82
142	Huntsville, AL	46.96	155	80
143	Indianapolis, IN	46.95	131	162
144	Moreno Valley, CA	46.65	138	154
145	Baltimore, MD	46.53	119	176
146	Laredo, TX	46.46	134	159
147	Rochester, NY	46.42	158	68
148	Toledo, OH	46.10	136	170
149	Winston-Salem, NC	45.94	140	165
150	Tulsa, OK	45.92	151	121
151	Baton Rouge, LA	45.60	150	140
152	Akron, OH	45.47	152	138
153	Greensboro, NC	45.36	148	151
154	Oklahoma City, OK	45.24	165	64
155	Augusta, GA	44.84	141	180
156	Providence, RI	44.28	169	76
157	Memphis, TN	44.04	145	179
158	San Bernardino, CA	43.84	156	169
159	Oxnard, CA	43.80	162	133
160	North Las Vegas, NV	43.66	163	137
161	Casper, WY	43.64	177	73
162	Las Cruces, NM	43.59	172	88
163	Anchorage, AK	43.48	160	145
164	Jackson, MS	43.19	154	177
165	New Haven, CT	43.07	178	77
166	Bakersfield, CA	42.96	175	102
167	Cleveland, OH	42.35	159	172
168	Huntington, WV	42.28	174	128
169	Stockton, CA	42.20	170	152
170	Fayetteville, NC	42.14	166	158
171	Brownsville, TX	42.12	161	171
172	Gulfport, MS	42.11	167	161
173	Mobile, AL	41.55	164	174
174	Montgomery, AL	41.48	171	164
175	Fresno, CA	41.45	173	155
176	Hialeah, FL	41.38	157	182
177	New Orleans, LA	40.64	180	142
178	Birmingham, AL	40.62	168	178
179	Columbus, GA	39.97	179	166
180	Newark, NJ	39.61	181	167
181	Detroit, MI	38.85	176	181
182	Shreveport, LA	37.49	182	175

 

Ask the Experts

Although the employment projections for 2018 appear to be promising, the job-hunting process can still be scary, especially for those entering the workforce for the first time or facing particular obstacles. To ease the burden on job seekers, we asked a panel of experts to share their thoughts on the following key questions:

• What is your prediction for the job market in 2018?
• What impact will the current administration’s policies have on job growth?
• Which fields are expected to grow the most in the coming years?
• Recent evidence suggests fewer people are moving across state lines in search for work. Why do you think this is, and what can be done to increase geographic mobility?
• What are the most common mistakes job seekers make when seeking employment?
• What types of programs have proven effective in helping unemployed individuals find work?
• Should unemployed people be required to do something in order to earn their unemployment benefits? If so, what?

Methodology

In order to determine the best job markets in the U.S., WalletHub compared 182 cities — including the 150 most populated U.S. cities, plus at least two of the most populated cities in each state — across two key dimensions, “Job Market” and “Socio-economics.” We assigned a heavier weight to the former, considering the fact that factors in that category most heavily influence a job seeker’s decision in terms of relocation for employment.

We then evaluated the two dimensions using 26 relevant metrics, which are listed below with their corresponding weights. Each metric was graded on a 100-point scale, with a score of 100 representing the most favorable conditions for job seekers.

Finally, we determined each city’s weighted average across all metrics to calculate its total score and used the resulting scores to rank-order our sample. In determining our sample, we considered only the city proper in each case, excluding cities in the surrounding metro area.

Job Market – Total Points: 80

• Job Opportunities: Double Weight (~7.62 Points)
  Note: This metric was calculated as follows: Number of Job Openings per Number of Population in Labor Force Minus Unemployment Rate.
• Employment Growth: Double Weight (~7.62 Points)
  Note: This metric measures the rate of annual job growth adjusted by the working-age population growth.
• Monthly Average Starting Salary: Full Weight (~3.81 Points)
  Note: This metric was adjusted for the cost of living.
• Unemployment Rate: Double Weight (~7.62 Points)
• Underemployment Rate: Full Weight (~3.81 Points)
• Industry Variety: Full Weight (~3.81 Points)
• Employment Outlook: Double Weight (~7.62 Points)
  Note: This metric is based on the Manpower Employment Outlook Survey.
• Job Security: Full Weight (~3.81 Points)
  Note: This metric was calculated as follows: (Number of Employees in 2016 – Number of Employees in 2015) / Number of Employees in 2015.
• Job Satisfaction: Full Weight (~3.81 Points)
• Retirement Access & Participation: Full Weight (~3.81 Points)
  Note: This metric considers only employer-based retirement plans.
• Access to Employee Benefits: Full Weight (~3.81 Points)
  Note: This metric measures the share of employees with private health insurance.
• Presence of Work-Share Programs: Full Weight (~3.81 Points)
  Note: This binary metric measures the presence or absence of state programs that allow employers to temporarily reduce work hours of employees instead of laying them off during economic downturns.
• Full-Time Employment: Full Weight (~3.81 Points)
  Note: This metric measures the number of part-time employees for every 100 full-time employees.
• Access to Internships: Full Weight (~3.81 Points)
  Note: This metric measures the number of internships per total civilian population aged 16 to 24 in the labor force.
• Apprentice-Trainee Jobs as Share of Total Jobs Posted on Glassdoor.com: Full Weight (~3.81 Points)
  Note: Apprentice-trainee jobs refers to on-the-job training.
• Share of Workers in Poverty: Full Weight (~3.81 Points)
  Note: This metric measures the percentage of employed residents whose incomes are below the poverty line.
• Disability-Friendliness of Employers: Full Weight (~3.81 Points)
  Note: This metric measures the percentage of persons with disabilities who are employed.

Socio-economics – Total Points: 20

• Median Annual Income: Full Weight (~2.22 Points)
  Note: This metric was adjusted for the cost of living.
• Average Work & Commute Time: Full Weight (~2.22 Points)
  Note: This metric measures the average length of a workday and the average commute time.
• Transit Accessibility of Workplace: Full Weight (~2.22 Points)
  Note: This metric measures the number of jobs accessible by a 30-minute transit ride per total civilian workforce.
• Housing Affordability: Full Weight (~2.22 Points)
• Annual Transportation Costs: Full Weight (~2.22 Points)
• Safety: Full Weight (~2.22 Points)
  Note: This metric measures the crime rate.
• Family-Friendliness: Full Weight (~2.22 Points)
  Note: This metric is based on WalletHub’s “Best & Worst Places to Raise a Family” ranking.
• Dating-Friendliness: Full Weight (~2.22 Points)
  Note: This metric is based on WalletHub’s “Best & Worst Cities for Singles” ranking.
• Recreation-Friendliness: Full Weight (~2.22 Points)
  Note: This metric is based on WalletHub’s “Best & Worst Cities for Recreation” ranking.

 

Sources: Data used to create this ranking were collected from the U.S. Census Bureau, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Federal Bureau of Investigation, U.S Department of Housing and Urban Development, Council for Community and Economic Research, Indeed, Center for Neighborhood Technology, The Pew Charitable Trusts, National Conference of State Legislatures, Glassdoor, ManpowerGroup, Chmura Economics & Analytics, Chegg and WalletHub research.