placestats

Treasure County, MT

A county, and one of the 3,222 county-level areas the Census Bureau reports for the United States.

Population761
Density0.3people per km² of land
Median household income$73,036
Land area2533km²

Its peers

These are the 50 areas most like Treasure County 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: Thomas County, NE, Haines Borough, AK, Kent County, TX, McCone County, MT, Banner County, NE, White Pine County, NV, Pershing County, NV, Grant County, NE. The peer scores below compare this county with all 50.

Least like its peers

The measures where Treasure Countyis 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.

MeasureValueAmong peersNationallyvs peers
Net business formation rate27.698th pct by value100th pct by value +3.1 sd
Business opening rate27.696th pct by value100th pct by value +2.2 sd
Share divorced17.2%98th pct by value98th pct by value +1.9 sd
Share of two or more races, not Hispanic0%5th pct by value2nd pct by value -1.7 sd
High cholesterol26.8%100th pct99th pct -1.7 sd
Gini index of income inequality0.4868th pct15th pct +1.7 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 here0.5014386-0.1Opportunity Atlas
Adults under 65 without health insurance9.6%4859-0.3CDC PLACES
Aggregate travel time to work uncertain5,955 min———Census ACS 5-year
All natural teeth lost, age 65 and over10%7686-0.7CDC PLACES
Any disability28.7%5672-0.2CDC PLACES
Arthritis24.2%1852+0.9CDC PLACES
Binge drinking22.5%185+1.0CDC PLACES
Black Protestant adherents098·45·-0.1
Business closing rate020·2·-1.3Census Business Dynamics Statistics
Business establishments16———Census Business Dynamics Statistics
Business establishments closed0———Census Business Dynamics Statistics
Business establishments opened4———Census Business Dynamics Statistics
Business opening rate27.696·100·+2.2Census Business Dynamics Statistics
Cancer other than skin cancer7.4%3819+0.3CDC PLACES
Catholic adherents25.786·88·+0.8
Child poverty rate, ages 0-17 uncertain16.8%4056+0.1Census SAIPE
Children in the mobility cohort185———Opportunity Atlas
Cholesterol screening80%3010-0.4CDC PLACES
Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease6.1%4668-0.0CDC PLACES
Cognitive disability15.2%4466+0.1CDC PLACES
Colorectal cancer screening54.9%4027-0.1CDC PLACES
Congregations per 10,000 people52.576·96·+0.3
Coronary heart disease5.3%5678-0.4CDC PLACES
Current asthma11.3%1021+0.9CDC PLACES
Current cigarette smoking14.4%5271-0.2CDC PLACES
Dental visit in the past year63.6%5875+0.3CDC PLACES
Depression25.1%1037+1.1CDC PLACES
Diagnosed diabetes8.3%8294-0.7CDC PLACES
Disability-free score0.49748·68·+0.1
Economy score1.1150·66·-0.2
Effective property tax rate0.61634·28·-0.5Census ACS 5-year
Employed397———BLS LAUS
Evangelical Protestant adherents11.656·27·-0.1
Fair or poor self-rated health17.2%4875-0.2CDC PLACES
Fine particulate matter61782+0.4County Health Rankings
Flu vaccination among Medicare enrollees0.48%9474+1.5County Health Rankings
Food insecurity12.4%5680-0.4CDC PLACES
Frequent mental distress18.4%3253+0.6CDC PLACES
Frequent physical distress13.1%3661+0.1CDC PLACES
Gini index of income inequality0.486815+1.7Census ACS 5-year
Gross domestic product$96,812k———BEA Regional Accounts
Health score0.43384·79·+0.9
Hearing disability7.2%4634-0.1CDC PLACES
High blood pressure28.9%7086-0.4CDC PLACES
High cholesterol26.8%10099-1.7CDC PLACES
Homeownership rate66.5%16·19·-1.0Census ACS 5-year
Housing insecurity10.3%5982-0.5CDC PLACES
Housing units479———Census ACS 5-year
Independent-living disability7.9%4468+0.0CDC PLACES
Labour force407———BLS LAUS
Lack of reliable transportation8%4463-0.3CDC PLACES
Lacking social and emotional support21.6%7477-0.6CDC PLACES
Loneliness30.8%7189-0.7CDC PLACES
Mainline Protestant adherents6.9650·54·-0.3
Mammography in the past two years74.4%6658+0.5CDC PLACES
Material security score0.34217·55·-0.4
Mean adjusted gross income per return$67,7152348-0.5IRS Statistics of Income
Mean travel time to work17.2 min4290-0.1Census ACS 5-year
Median age53.4 years92·97·+1.5Census ACS 5-year
Median home value$215,30069·67·+0.1Census ACS 5-year
Median household income$73,036—75—Census ACS 5-year
Median household income (model-based)$61,5602447-0.7Census SAIPE
Median property tax bill1,32644·40·-0.2Census ACS 5-year
Membership organisations0545-0.6County Health Rankings
Mobility disability11%5881-0.3CDC PLACES
Net business formation rate27.698·100·+3.1Census Business Dynamics Statistics
No leisure-time physical activity20.7%7289-0.6CDC PLACES
Obesity34.1%6280-0.1CDC PLACES
Occupied housing units382———Census ACS 5-year
Orthodox Christian adherents094·78·-0.2
Other religion adherents042·11·-0.5
Owner-occupied housing units254———Census ACS 5-year
People covered by a tax return690———IRS Statistics of Income
People per tax return290·94·+1.0IRS Statistics of Income
People who did not move576———IRS county migration flows
Per capita income$45,8828891+1.5Census ACS 5-year
Per capita personal income$60,0893467-0.4BEA Regional Accounts
Personal income$46,088k———BEA Regional Accounts
Population767———BEA Regional Accounts
Population772———County Health Rankings
Population aged 15 and over651———Census ACS 5-year
Population aged 18 and over586———CDC PLACES
Population aged 25 and over607———Census ACS 5-year
Population aged 65 and over172———Census ACS 5-year
Population below the poverty line uncertain82———Census ACS 5-year
Population below the poverty line uncertain97———Census SAIPE
Population for whom poverty status is determined761———Census ACS 5-year
Population for whom poverty status is determined770———Census SAIPE
Population in the same house one year ago640———Census ACS 5-year
Population with a bachelor's degree or higher uncertain199———Census ACS 5-year
Population, decennial census762———
Poverty rate uncertain10.8%4871-0.1Census ACS 5-year
Poverty rate (model-based)12.6%3058+0.1Census SAIPE
Presidential votes cast, 2000479———MIT Election Data and Science Lab
Presidential votes cast, 2004482———MIT Election Data and Science Lab
Presidential votes cast, 2008486———MIT Election Data and Science Lab
Presidential votes cast, 2012455———MIT Election Data and Science Lab
Presidential votes cast, 2016443———MIT Election Data and Science Lab
Presidential votes cast, 2020460———MIT Election Data and Science Lab
Presidential votes cast, 2024442———MIT Election Data and Science Lab
Private job growth-2.6520·8·-0.4BLS Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages
Private jobs147———BLS Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages
Received food stamps8.9%56·18·-0.4CDC PLACES
Religious adherents44.248·42·-0.2
Republican share of the two-party vote, 200076.437·92·-0.2MIT Election Data and Science Lab
Republican share of the two-party vote, 200474.233·85·-0.4MIT Election Data and Science Lab
Republican share of the two-party vote, 200866.823·72·-0.7MIT Election Data and Science Lab
Republican share of the two-party vote, 201273.723·80·-0.5MIT Election Data and Science Lab
Republican share of the two-party vote, 201685.642·92·+0.2MIT Election Data and Science Lab
Republican share of the two-party vote, 202082.737·87·-0.0MIT Election Data and Science Lab
Republican share of the two-party vote, 202486.647·93·+0.3MIT Election Data and Science Lab
Republican swing, 2000 to 202410.181·53·+0.7MIT Election Data and Science Lab
Returns claiming charitable contributions0%48·5·-0.8IRS Statistics of Income
Returns claiming the earned income credit0%24·1·-1.2IRS Statistics of Income
Returns reporting capital gains27.3%54·94·+0.3IRS Statistics of Income
Returns reporting unemployment compensation0%62·9·-0.6IRS Statistics of Income
Routine checkup in the past year68.5%28·6·-0.6CDC PLACES
Self-care disability3.2%4872-0.2CDC PLACES
Share aged 65 and over22.6%54·75·+0.1Census ACS 5-year
Share Black, not Hispanic0%—5·—Census ACS 5-year
Share divorced uncertain17.2%98·98·+1.9Census ACS 5-year
Share in the same house a year ago84.1%12·15·-1.0Census ACS 5-year
Share Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, not Hispanic0%100·83·—Census ACS 5-year
Share never married uncertain12%6·0·-1.5Census ACS 5-year
Share now married63.1%72·97·+0.5Census ACS 5-year
Share of births to unmarried women0%86·11·-0.4Census ACS 5-year
Share of some other race, not Hispanic0%100·53·—Census ACS 5-year
Share of two or more races, not Hispanic0%5·2·-1.7Census ACS 5-year
Share White, not Hispanic92.9%88·86·+0.7Census ACS 5-year
Share widowed uncertain7.68%73·66·+0.4Census ACS 5-year
Share with a bachelor's degree or higher uncertain32.8%9083+1.1Census ACS 5-year
Sleeping less than 7 hours30.6%8295-1.0CDC PLACES
Stroke2.9%4467-0.2CDC PLACES
Taking blood pressure medication52.1%32·10·-0.7CDC PLACES
Tax returns filed330———IRS Statistics of Income
Tests taken633———Stanford Education Data Archive
Threat of utility shut-off7.4%5072-0.3CDC PLACES
Total population761———Census ACS 5-year
Unemployed10———BLS LAUS
Unemployment rate2.5%6086-0.5BLS LAUS
Vacancy rate uncertain20.3%31·71·-0.6Census ACS 5-year
Vacant housing units uncertain97———Census ACS 5-year
Vision disability4.3%4672-0.2CDC PLACES
Women aged 15 to 50 uncertain103———Census ACS 5-year
Workers aged 16 and over who commute347———Census ACS 5-year

13of 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.