Corozal Municipio, PR
A municipio, and one of the 3,222 county-level areas the Census Bureau reports for the United States.
Population34,474
Density313.0people per km² of land
Median household income$23,933
Land area110km²
Its peers
These are the 50 areas most like Corozal Municipio in population density and median household income (the middle household income). Both are measured in percentage terms and put on the same scale, so neither one counts for more. The closest eight: Juana DÃaz Municipio, PR, Luquillo Municipio, PR, Añasco Municipio, PR, Arecibo Municipio, PR, Quebradillas Municipio, PR, Morovis Municipio, PR, Villalba Municipio, PR, Santa Isabel Municipio, PR. The peer scores below compare this county with all 50.
Least like its peers
The measures where Corozal Municipiois furthest from the average of its peers. The gap is shown in “sd” (standard deviations), which means typical gaps between peers: −2 sd is about two typical gaps below the peer average. A national ranking would hide these numbers behind the county’s income.
| Measure | Value | Among peers | Nationally | vs peers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Adult income rank of children raised poor here | 0.416 | 100th pct | 47th pct | +2.3 sd |
| Share divorced | 9.11% | 0th pct by value | 13th pct by value | -2.3 sd |
| Mean travel time to work | 34.6 min | 6th pct | 5th pct | +1.7 sd |
| Median property tax bill | $200 or less | 24th pct by value | 1st pct by value | -1.2 sd |
| Share never married | 44.9% | 82nd pct by value | 96th pct by value | +0.9 sd |
| Homeownership rate | 75.7% | 82nd pct by value | 58th pct by value | +0.9 sd |
How it has changed
This chart covers 2010–2024. A few measures were published only once — the school, moving-up-the-income-ladder (mobility) and social-ties (social capital) ones. They show as a single point that says so. Everything else is drawn over the years its publisher covers. Each value sits at the year it describes, not the year it came out.
Loading…
Every measure
Rates and medians come first, then counts. Counts have no peer score. A county’s population cannot be high or low “for its peers” when the peers were picked partly by density. Density and median household income have no peer score either, since they are what the peers were picked by.
| Adult income rank of children raised poor here | 0.416 | 100 | 47 | +2.3 | Opportunity Atlas |
| Aggregate travel time to work | 376,920 min | — | — | — | Census ACS 5-year |
| Employed | 11,306 | — | — | — | BLS LAUS |
| Gini index of income inequality | 0.484 | 66 | 16 | -0.5 | Census ACS 5-year |
| Homeownership rate | 75.7% | 82· | 58· | +0.9 | Census ACS 5-year |
| Housing units | 13,371 | — | — | — | Census ACS 5-year |
| Labour force | 11,972 | — | — | — | BLS LAUS |
| Mean travel time to work | 34.6 min | 6 | 5 | +1.7 | Census ACS 5-year |
| Median age | 42.8 years | 26· | 62· | -0.6 | Census ACS 5-year |
| Median gross rent | $515 | 38· | 2· | -0.3 | Census ACS 5-year |
| Median home value | $117,800 | 68· | 19· | +0.3 | Census ACS 5-year |
| Median household income | $23,933 | — | 2 | — | Census ACS 5-year |
| Median property tax bill | $200 or less | 24· | 1· | -1.2 | Census ACS 5-year |
| Occupied housing units | 10,902 | — | — | — | Census ACS 5-year |
| Owner-occupied housing units | 8,258 | — | — | — | Census ACS 5-year |
| Per capita income | $12,491 | 20 | 1 | -0.8 | Census ACS 5-year |
| Population aged 15 and over | 29,368 | — | — | — | Census ACS 5-year |
| Population aged 25 and over | 25,031 | — | — | — | Census ACS 5-year |
| Population aged 65 and over | 6,979 | — | — | — | Census ACS 5-year |
| Population below the poverty line | 15,142 | — | — | — | Census ACS 5-year |
| Population for whom poverty status is determined | 34,293 | — | — | — | Census ACS 5-year |
| Population with a bachelor's degree or higher | 5,472 | — | — | — | Census ACS 5-year |
| Poverty rate | 44.2% | 60 | 2 | -0.1 | Census ACS 5-year |
| Private job growth | 2.59 | 54· | 63· | -0.0 | BLS Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages |
| Private jobs | 2,896 | — | — | — | BLS Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages |
| Share aged 65 and over | 20.2% | 20· | 56· | -0.8 | Census ACS 5-year |
| Share American Indian or Alaska Native, not Hispanic | 0% | 100· | 24· | — | Census ACS 5-year |
| Share Black, not Hispanic | 0% | — | 5· | — | Census ACS 5-year |
| Share divorced | 9.11% | 0· | 13· | -2.3 | Census ACS 5-year |
| Share Hispanic or Latino, any race | 99.7% | 70· | 99· | +0.6 | Census ACS 5-year |
| Share Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, not Hispanic | 0% | 100· | 83· | — | Census ACS 5-year |
| Share never married | 44.9% | 82· | 96· | +0.9 | Census ACS 5-year |
| Share now married | 39% | 72· | 6· | +0.6 | Census ACS 5-year |
| Share of births to unmarried women uncertain | 85.7% | 79· | 96· | +0.7 | Census ACS 5-year |
| Share of some other race, not Hispanic | 0% | 100· | 53· | — | Census ACS 5-year |
| Share of two or more races, not Hispanic | 0% | 100· | 2· | — | Census ACS 5-year |
| Share separated uncertain | 2.16% | 58· | 71· | -0.1 | Census ACS 5-year |
| Share widowed | 7% | 30· | 52· | -0.7 | Census ACS 5-year |
| Share with a bachelor's degree or higher | 21.9% | 26 | 51 | -0.6 | Census ACS 5-year |
| Total population | 34,474 | — | — | — | Census ACS 5-year |
| Unemployed | 666 | — | — | — | BLS LAUS |
| Unemployment rate | 5.6% | 82 | 7 | -0.8 | BLS LAUS |
| Vacancy rate | 18.5% | 40· | 65· | -0.5 | Census ACS 5-year |
| Vacant housing units | 2,469 | — | — | — | Census ACS 5-year |
| Women aged 15 to 50 | 7,899 | — | — | — | Census ACS 5-year |
| Workers aged 16 and over who commute | 10,898 | — | — | — | Census ACS 5-year |
2of these values are marked uncertain. Either the published margin of error (the likely range around a survey estimate) is wide compared with the estimate, or the value was split across Connecticut’s 2022 boundary change. A split value is shared out between old and new areas, not measured directly.
A percentile is the share of the comparison group at or below this county’s value. A peer score needs at least 20 peers with published data. Where fewer report, the cell is left blank instead of being worked out from a handful.