These Are The 10 Worst Rancho Cucamonga Suburbs For 2018

We used science and data to determine which Rancho Cucamonga suburbs are the real pits.

Join RoadSnacks

Swipe left for slideshow. Article continues below.

Not everyone is cut out for city life. Some people would prefer to live in the cities and towns that surround Rancho Cucamonga.

So the question arises, do the suburbs maintain a semblance of the larger-than-life appeal of their more famous neighbor?

Today, we’ll use science and data to determine which Rancho Cucamonga ‘burbs need a little tender loving care – the sore thumbs of the Rancho Cucamonga area if you will. Realistically, you can’t expect all the suburbs to live up to Rancho Cucamonga proper, although Sierra Madre certainly tries.

Of course, not all suburbs of Rancho Cucamonga are created equally, which is precisely why we set out to find the best ones. So without further ado…

We examined the 51 biggest suburbs of Rancho Cucamonga to find out the worst places to live. And while you won’t necessarily find them on the worst places to live in California lists, these ten places are a little too far downwind of Rancho Cucamonga in terms of quality of life.

Here are the 10 worst suburbs around Rancho Cucamonga for 2018:

  1. San Bernardino (Photos)
  2. Hesperia
  3. Jurupa Valley
  4. Rialto (Photos)
  5. Colton (Photos)
  6. Highland (Photos)
  7. Moreno Valley (Photos)
  8. Pomona (Photos)
  9. El Monte (Photos)
  10. Ontario (Photos)

Read on to see how we determined the places around Rancho Cucamonga that need a pick-me-up. And remember, don’t blame the messenger.

Or, if you’re thinking of moving to elsewhere in California check out the best places in California overall or the worst.

And remember, there are some good places to live around Rancho Cucamonga too.

Editor’s Note: If you see a slight difference between the worst in state rankings and this suburb ranking, it’s because of the methodology. We needed a way to include more places, so we eliminated crime and commute times as criteria for this analysis.

For more California reading, check out:

Determining The Worst Suburbs Around Rancho Cucamonga for 2018

To figure out how bad a place is to live in, we only needed to know what kinds of things people like and then decide what cities have the least amount of those things.

We threw a lot of criteria at this one in order to get the best, most complete results possible. Using the most recent American Community Survey data, this is the criteria we used:

  • High unemployment rate
  • Low median household incomes
  • Low population density (no things to do)
  • Low home values
  • A lot of high school drop outs
  • High poverty
  • High rate of uninsured families

FYI: We defined a suburb as being within 30 miles of Rancho Cucamonga.

Additionally, we limited the analysis to places that have over 5,000 people. This left us with a grand total of 51 suburbs to evaluate around Rancho Cucamonga.

We ranked each place with scores from 1 to 51 in each category, where 1 was the “worst”.

Next, we averaged the rankings for each place to create a quality of life index.

And finally, we crowned the city with the worst quality of life index the “Worst Suburb near Rancho Cucamonga.” We’re lookin’ at you, San Bernardino.

Read on below to learn more about what it’s like to live in the worst of the worst. Or skip to the end to see the list of all the suburbs ranked from worst to best.

1. San Bernardino

San Bernardino, California

Population: 214,581
Unemployment Rate: 14.1%
Median Home Price: $176,800
Median Income: $38,456
More on San Bernardino: Data | Jobs

We’ll get the ball rolling with San Bernardino, the absolute worst place to live around Rancho Cucamonga according to the data.

And in the world of worst rankings, San Bernardino beat the competition pretty handily thanks to scoring in the bottom 15% in three major categories. Income is the 1st worst in the Rancho Cucamonga area, and to make matters worse, the city ranks 2nd worst when it comes to home values.

But hey, at least it’s cheap to live there. But there’s a reason for that… it’s San Bernardino.

You won’t feel bad about not having a great income for the area, there aren’t a bunch of places to spend your money anyway.

2. Hesperia

Population: 92,664
Unemployment Rate: 13.6%
Median Home Price: $172,800
Median Income: $46,446
More on Hesperia: Data | Jobs

Welcome to Hesperia. Home to KMart, Big Lots, and a lot of gas stations.

This city is 23.6 miles to Rancho Cucamonga. Income levels here are the 6th lowest in the metro area, where families bring in about $46,446 a year, which doesn’t go a long ways even on a shoestring budget.

But on the bright side, there are a lot of fast food joints in the area.

3. Jurupa Valley

Population: 100,737
Unemployment Rate: 12.7%
Median Home Price: $270,700
Median Income: $58,849
More on Jurupa Valley: Data | Jobs

Back up the highway we go for the third worst Rancho Cucamonga suburb you can live in. You might have expected to see Jurupa Valley on here. While the cost of living is low, your entertainment and work options are limited. And that’s an understatement.

In terms of numbers, it’s in the worst 15% for insurance, and the adult high school drop out rate is poor compared to other Rancho Cucamonga suburbs.

But at least there are nice parks to bring the kids during the day.

4. Rialto

Rialto, California

Source: Public domain

Population: 102,418
Unemployment Rate: 13.8%
Median Home Price: $236,100
Median Income: $52,347
More on Rialto: Data | Jobs

If you live in Rialto, most likely you struggle to make ends meet every month. It ranks as the 10th lowest Rancho Cucamonga suburb when it comes to residents making money.

Not only that, but this is the 2nd worst unemployed suburb you can live in if you choose to live near Rancho Cucamonga. Remember, we looked at 51 cities for this study.

Rialto is about 10.1 miles to downtown.

5. Colton

Colton, California

Population: 53,856
Unemployment Rate: 9.8%
Median Home Price: $189,500
Median Income: $43,966
More on Colton: Data | Jobs

Colton has the distinction of being a Rancho Cucamonga suburb. Which means that’s about all it has going for it.

All snarkiness aside, Colton has the 3rd lowest home values in the metro Rancho Cucamonga area, where the median price is $189,500. To put that into perspective, in Sierra Madre, the median income is $131,386, which is the best in the area.

Colton has an unemployment rate of 9.8% which ranks 14th worst.

6. Highland

Highland, California

Population: 54,490
Unemployment Rate: 11.4%
Median Home Price: $269,000
Median Income: $53,504
More on Highland: Data | Jobs

Highland has 54,490 residents that probably know it’s a pretty crummy place to live when you look at the data. (Or, if you’ve ever been there, you don’t need to look at the data.)

Incomes are towards the bottom and the poverty rate sits at 20.7%.

7. Moreno Valley

Moreno Valley, California

Population: 202,061
Unemployment Rate: 12.3%
Median Home Price: $231,400
Median Income: $56,456
More on Moreno Valley: Data | Jobs

Ah, Moreno Valley. You rank as the 7th worst place to live around Rancho Cucamonga.

It’s the place with the 5th most out of work residents in the Rancho Cucamonga metro area (12.3%).

8. Pomona

Pomona, California

Source: Public domain

Population: 151,807
Unemployment Rate: 11.0%
Median Home Price: $310,100
Median Income: $50,360
More on Pomona: Data | Jobs

Pomona is a city about 12.1 miles from Rancho Cucamonga, but Rancho Cucamonga probably wishes it was further away. It ranks as the 8th worst burb for 2018.

You’d be hard pressed to find a worse place to live. Pomona has the 5th most uninsured people, 7th worst incomes, and has the 7th highest unemployment rate (11.0%) in the entire Rancho Cucamonga metro area.

Homes only cost $310,100 for a reason. That’s cheap for Rancho Cucamonga standards.

9. El Monte

El Monte, California

Source: Public domain

Population: 115,665
Unemployment Rate: 9.2%
Median Home Price: $374,900
Median Income: $40,654
More on El Monte: Data | Jobs

If you absolutely have to live near Rancho Cucamonga, then El Monte might be a place for you to consider as it’s only the 9th worst Rancho Cucamonga suburb.

About 9.2% of residents are out of work.

10. Ontario

Ontario, California

Population: 169,389
Unemployment Rate: 9.3%
Median Home Price: $293,000
Median Income: $54,896
More on Ontario: Data | Jobs

Rounding out the ten worst Rancho Cucamonga suburbs to call home is Ontario.

Located 6.2 miles outside the city, Ontarios is a real pit when you look at the data. Its residents have the 19th highest unemployment rate (9.3%), and poverty is far above the area average.

The areas around Rancho Cucamonga where the dream is more of a nightmare for 2018

Well there you have it — the worst of the ‘burbs surrounding Rancho Cucamonga with San Bernardino casting itself ahead of the pack.

As we mentioned earlier, the suburbs around Rancho Cucamonga aren’t all bad. Sierra Madre takes the cake as the best place to live around Rancho Cucamonga.

For more California reading, check out:

Detailed List Of The Worst Rancho Cucamonga Suburbs

Rank City Population Unemployment Rate Median Home Price Median Income
1 San Bernardino 214,581 14.1% $176,800 $38,456
2 Hesperia 92,664 13.6% $172,800 $46,446
3 Jurupa Valley 100,737 12.7% $270,700 $58,849
4 Rialto 102,418 13.8% $236,100 $52,347
5 Colton 53,856 9.8% $189,500 $43,966
6 Highland 54,490 11.4% $269,000 $53,504
7 Moreno Valley 202,061 12.3% $231,400 $56,456
8 Pomona 151,807 11.0% $310,100 $50,360
9 El Monte 115,665 9.2% $374,900 $40,654
10 Ontario 169,389 9.3% $293,000 $54,896
11 Riverside 318,678 11.0% $286,600 $58,979
12 Montclair 38,294 9.3% $281,100 $50,374
13 South El Monte 20,566 7.0% $363,100 $42,460
14 Fontana 205,228 10.2% $289,400 $65,995
15 Baldwin Park 76,511 8.8% $333,500 $53,651
16 Duarte 21,792 10.4% $385,600 $65,571
17 La Puente 40,384 8.1% $343,000 $57,174
18 Rosemead 54,507 8.2% $455,100 $45,510
19 Azusa 48,498 8.1% $342,000 $56,569
20 Loma Linda 23,859 6.8% $291,600 $51,390
21 Chino 83,670 9.0% $365,500 $72,832
22 Anaheim 346,776 8.1% $457,600 $61,826
23 Grand Terrace 12,393 9.6% $249,700 $64,188
24 La Habra 61,660 10.0% $436,200 $65,799
25 Redlands 70,442 7.1% $326,800 $66,514
26 Corona 161,614 7.8% $378,500 $72,309
27 West Covina 107,634 9.9% $430,800 $71,217
28 Covina 48,539 9.7% $415,300 $65,451
29 Monrovia 37,090 9.6% $583,300 $67,167
30 Norco 26,809 8.5% $445,700 $87,067
31 Fullerton 139,491 8.6% $551,300 $67,110
32 Glendora 51,285 10.1% $481,800 $78,448
33 Upland 75,851 5.9% $444,200 $62,369
34 Orange 139,919 7.3% $565,800 $79,192
35 Whittier 86,630 6.7% $458,500 $67,431
36 Eastvale 58,217 9.6% $460,100 $104,940
37 San Dimas 34,109 7.0% $481,000 $79,081
38 Placentia 52,168 6.8% $554,500 $80,668
39 Chino Hills 77,266 7.0% $537,800 $97,222
40 La Verne 32,078 7.0% $500,300 $78,385
41 La Mirada 49,130 6.9% $448,400 $81,956
42 Claremont 35,827 6.8% $581,100 $94,005
43 Diamond Bar 56,456 7.3% $593,100 $89,845
44 Brea 41,351 6.4% $579,600 $85,555
45 Walnut 30,026 6.6% $679,700 $97,345
46 Arcadia 57,755 6.5% $920,700 $83,958
47 Villa Park 5,922 8.7% $1,030,800 $131,386
48 La Habra Heights 5,406 4.9% $893,200 $110,329
49 El Cerrito 24,646 6.6% $636,600 $92,670
50 Yorba Linda 67,362 6.5% $728,300 $119,697
51 Sierra Madre 11,067 5.3% $861,200 $95,256

About Chris Kolmar

Chris Kolmar has been in the real estate business for almost ten years now. He originally worked for Movoto Real Estate as the director of marketing before founding HomeSnacks.

He believes the key to finding the right place to live comes down to looking at the data, reading about things to do, and, most importantly, checking it out yourself before you move.

If you've been looking for a place to live in the past several years, you've probably stumbled upon his writing already.

You can find out more about him on LinkedIn or his website.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *