The 10 Worst Rancho Cucamonga Suburbs For 2023

We used data and Friday Night Science to identify the worst suburbs of Rancho Cucamonga for 2023. The worst Rancho Cucamonga suburbs are Hesperia and San Bernardino.

The suburbs of Rancho Cucamonga call to all types of people looking to escape city life. Some people would prefer to live in the cities and towns that surround Rancho Cucamonga to avoid all the hustle and bustle.

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 Saturday Night Science 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 only expect some of the suburbs to live up to Rancho Cucamonga proper, although Yorba Linda 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.

We examined the 52 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.

The 10 worst suburbs around Rancho Cucamonga for 2023

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

Now don’t freak out.

What’s the worst suburb of Rancho Cucamonga? Hesperia ranks as the worst suburb of Rancho Cucamonga for 2023 based on the most recent Census and FBI data.

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.

Table Of Contents: Top Ten | Methodology | Summary | Table

For more California reading, check out:

The 10 Worst Rancho Cucamonga Suburbs To Live For 2023

Overall SnackAbility


Population: 99,287
Median Income: $58,578 (3rd lowest)
Unemployment Rate: 10.1% (2nd highest)
Median Home Value: $279,600 (2nd lowest)
More on Hesperia:

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

And in the world of worst rankings, Hesperia beat the competition pretty handily thanks to scoring in the bottom 15% in three major categories. Income is the 3rd 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 Hesperia.

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.

San Bernardino, CA

Source: Flickr User MOHSEN.WISE | CC BY 2.0
Overall SnackAbility


Population: 220,821
Median Income: $55,372 (lowest)
Unemployment Rate: 8.4% (4th highest)
Median Home Value: $293,000 (3rd lowest)
More on San Bernardino:

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

This city is 15.5 miles to Rancho Cucamonga. Income levels here are the lowest in the metro area, where families bring in about $55,372 a year, which only goes so far even on a shoestring budget.

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

Rialto, CA

Source: Public domain
Overall SnackAbility


Population: 103,799
Median Income: $69,934 (11th lowest)
Unemployment Rate: 10.1% (highest)
Median Home Value: $350,000 (5th lowest)
More on Rialto:

Back up the highway we go for the third worst Rancho Cucamonga suburb you can live in. You might have expected to see Rialto 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 dropout rate is poor compared to other Rancho Cucamonga suburbs.

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

Colton, CA

Source: Wikipedia User Bruce Fingerhood from Springfield, Oregon, US | CC BY 2.0
Overall SnackAbility


Population: 53,894
Median Income: $60,874 (5th lowest)
Unemployment Rate: 7.4% (7th highest)
Median Home Value: $325,800 (4th lowest)
More on Colton:

If you live in Colton, most likely you struggle to make ends meet every month. It ranks as the 5th lowest Rancho Cucamonga suburb for median household incomes.

Not only that, but this is the 7th worst unemployed suburb you can live in if you choose to live near Rancho Cucamonga. Remember, we looked at 52 cities for this study.

Colton is about 14.5 miles to downtown.

Overall SnackAbility


Population: 104,684
Median Income: $83,430 (24th lowest)
Unemployment Rate: 7.2% (12th highest)
Median Home Value: $416,300 (10th lowest)
More on Jurupa Valley:

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

All snarkiness aside, Jurupa Valley has the 9th lowest home values in the metro Rancho Cucamonga area, where the median price is $416,300. The median income is $181,591.

Jurupa Valley has an unemployment rate of 7.21% which ranks 12th worst.

Montclair, CA

Source: Wikipedia User Westpacificmovement | CC BY-SA 4.0
Overall SnackAbility


Population: 37,871
Median Income: $67,483 (8th lowest)
Unemployment Rate: 7.8% (6th highest)
Median Home Value: $423,300 (13th lowest)
More on Montclair:

Montclair has 37,871 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 17.779793022511466%.

Highland, CA

Source: Wikipedia User Jessie Terwilliger from Beaumont, CA, USA | CC BY 2.0
Overall SnackAbility


Population: 56,733
Median Income: $69,225 (10th lowest)
Unemployment Rate: 6.3% (23rd highest)
Median Home Value: $356,700 (7th lowest)
More on Highland:

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

It’s the place with the 23rd most out of work residents in the Rancho Cucamonga metro area (6.3%).

Moreno Valley, CA

Source: Wikipedia User No machine-readable author provided. Slowking Man~commonswiki assumed (based on copyright claims). | GFDL
Overall SnackAbility


Population: 208,371
Median Income: $73,635 (14th lowest)
Unemployment Rate: 8.0% (5th highest)
Median Home Value: $353,400 (6th lowest)
More on Moreno Valley:

Moreno Valley is a city about 24.7 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. Moreno Valley has the 10th most uninsured people, 14th worst incomes, and has the 5th highest unemployment rate (8.04%) in the entire Rancho Cucamonga metro area.

Homes only cost $353,400 for a reason. That’s cheap for Rancho Cucamonga standards.

El Monte, CA

Source: Public domain
Overall SnackAbility


Population: 110,144
Median Income: $56,524 (2nd lowest)
Unemployment Rate: 7.1% (13th highest)
Median Home Value: $508,200 (22nd lowest)
More on El Monte:

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 7.09% of residents are out of work.

Pomona, CA

Source: Public domain
Overall SnackAbility


Population: 151,592
Median Income: $67,549 (9th lowest)
Unemployment Rate: 6.6% (18th highest)
Median Home Value: $446,300 (15th lowest)
More on Pomona:

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

Located 12.1 miles outside the city, Pomonas is a real pit when you look at the data. Its residents have the 18th highest unemployment rate (6.57%), and poverty is far above the area average.

Methodology: Determining The Worst Suburbs Around Rancho Cucamonga for 2023

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

It’s Saturday Night Science.

We threw a lot of criteria at this one to get the best, most complete results possible. Using the most recent American Community Survey data from 2017-2021, 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 dropouts
  • High poverty
  • High rate of uninsured families

We defined a suburb as any town within 30 miles of Rancho Cucamonga.

We also limited the analysis to places with over 5,000 people. This left us with a grand total of 52 suburbs to evaluate around Rancho Cucamonga.

We ranked each place with scores from 1 to 52 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 looking at you, Hesperia.

We updated this article for 2023, which reflects our tenth time ranking the worst suburbs around Rancho Cucamonga.

Summary: The areas around Rancho Cucamonga where the dream is more of a nightmare for 2023

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

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

  • Yorba Linda
  • Sierra Madre
  • Villa Park

For more California reading, check out:

Detailed List Of The Worst Rancho Cucamonga Suburbs

Rank City Population Median Income Median Home Values
1 Hesperia 99,287 $58,578 $279,600
2 San Bernardino 220,821 $55,372 $293,000
3 Rialto 103,799 $69,934 $350,000
4 Colton 53,894 $60,874 $325,800
5 Jurupa Valley 104,684 $83,430 $416,300
6 Montclair 37,871 $67,483 $423,300
7 Highland 56,733 $69,225 $356,700
8 Moreno Valley 208,371 $73,635 $353,400
9 El Monte 110,144 $56,524 $508,200
10 Pomona 151,592 $67,549 $446,300
11 Ontario 175,223 $71,908 $438,300
12 South El Monte 19,860 $60,244 $478,800
13 Loma Linda 24,712 $63,272 $416,300
14 La Puente 38,447 $73,827 $467,200
15 Riverside 314,858 $76,755 $418,000
16 Baldwin Park 72,813 $72,554 $464,800
17 Azusa 49,457 $74,043 $477,300
18 Grand Terrace 13,079 $76,791 $378,100
19 Fontana 208,087 $83,468 $423,100
20 Temple 5,093 $77,509 $129,100
21 Anaheim 348,204 $81,806 $623,300
22 Duarte 21,723 $86,903 $575,500
23 Rosemead 51,698 $64,224 $610,000
24 Chino 90,279 $91,107 $503,800
25 Redlands 72,649 $87,184 $455,700
26 La Habra 63,287 $88,002 $600,400
27 Covina 51,061 $81,570 $575,500
28 Upland 78,624 $82,259 $571,600
29 Fullerton 142,964 $92,718 $698,600
30 Corona 157,844 $95,268 $530,100
31 West Covina 109,396 $89,834 $602,400
32 Whittier 87,184 $80,306 $630,200
33 Monrovia 37,999 $87,077 $723,000
34 La Verne 31,423 $95,957 $625,000
35 Glendora 52,458 $103,159 $662,400
36 Orange 139,195 $102,125 $712,500
37 San Dimas 34,775 $101,144 $626,000
38 Norco 26,176 $115,619 $594,800
39 Chino Hills 78,229 $109,285 $677,000
40 Brea 46,912 $108,721 $727,500
41 Claremont 36,312 $111,937 $711,800
42 Placentia 51,951 $103,041 $697,900
43 Diamond Bar 55,339 $100,776 $702,600
44 Arcadia 56,697 $99,588 $1,152,200
45 La Mirada 47,957 $97,672 $629,900
46 Walnut 28,641 $121,882 $827,700
47 La Habra Heights 5,651 $181,591 $945,800
48 Eastvale 68,539 $141,827 $615,300
49 El Cerrito 25,898 $116,875 $894,600
50 Villa Park 5,864 $172,375 $1,287,100
51 Sierra Madre 11,253 $116,884 $1,048,300
52 Yorba Linda 68,319 $137,011 $884,900
About Nick Johnson

Nick Johnson earned his masters in Business Administration from the Drucker School At Claremont Graduate University. He has written for 39 publications across the country and ran the media relations department at Movoto, a real estate portal based in San Francisco. He has been featured in over 500 publications as an expert in real estate and as an authority on real estate trends.

Nick's the creator of the HomeSnacks YouTube channel that now has over 260,000 subscribers and is an excellent source to learn about different parts of the country.

Leave a Reply

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