We scored 187 U.S. metros on the conditions that drive basement water and foundation problems — soil, freeze–thaw, rainfall, basement prevalence, and water proximity.
Home › Research › Basement Water Risk Index
Journalists and bloggers are welcome to cite these findings with a link to this page.
| # | Metro | Risk Index | Top factor |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Bismarck, ND | 80 | expansive / clay soil |
| 2 | Burlington, VT | 80 | winter freeze–thaw |
| 3 | Davenport, IA | 80 | high basement prevalence |
| 4 | Fargo, ND | 80 | expansive / clay soil |
| 5 | Grand Forks, ND | 80 | expansive / clay soil |
| 6 | Green Bay, WI | 80 | winter freeze–thaw |
| 7 | Kenosha, WI | 80 | winter freeze–thaw |
| 8 | Madison, WI | 80 | winter freeze–thaw |
| 9 | Milwaukee, WI | 80 | winter freeze–thaw |
| 10 | Portland, ME | 80 | winter freeze–thaw |
| 11 | Bangor, ME | 76 | winter freeze–thaw |
| 12 | Boston, MA | 76 | high basement prevalence |
| 13 | Bridgeport, CT | 76 | high basement prevalence |
| 14 | Cambridge, MA | 76 | high basement prevalence |
| 15 | Cedar Rapids, IA | 76 | high basement prevalence |
| 16 | Chicago, IL | 76 | high basement prevalence |
| 17 | Cincinnati, OH | 76 | high basement prevalence |
| 18 | Concord, NH | 76 | winter freeze–thaw |
| 19 | Des Moines, IA | 76 | high basement prevalence |
| 20 | Detroit, MI | 76 | winter freeze–thaw |
| 21 | Duluth, MN | 76 | winter freeze–thaw |
| 22 | Evansville, IN | 76 | high basement prevalence |
| 23 | Grand Rapids, MI | 76 | winter freeze–thaw |
| 24 | Hartford, CT | 76 | high basement prevalence |
| 25 | Kalamazoo, MI | 76 | winter freeze–thaw |
| 26 | Lansing, MI | 76 | winter freeze–thaw |
| 27 | Lewiston, ME | 76 | winter freeze–thaw |
| 28 | Manchester, NH | 76 | winter freeze–thaw |
| 29 | Minneapolis, MN | 76 | winter freeze–thaw |
| 30 | Montpelier, VT | 76 | winter freeze–thaw |
| 31 | Nashua, NH | 76 | winter freeze–thaw |
| 32 | New Haven, CT | 76 | high basement prevalence |
| 33 | Peoria, IL | 76 | high basement prevalence |
| 34 | Pittsburgh, PA | 76 | high basement prevalence |
| 35 | Providence, RI | 76 | high basement prevalence |
| 36 | Rockford, IL | 76 | high basement prevalence |
| 37 | Rutland, VT | 76 | winter freeze–thaw |
| 38 | Saint Louis, MO | 76 | expansive / clay soil |
| 39 | Saint Paul, MN | 76 | winter freeze–thaw |
| 40 | Springfield, MA | 76 | high basement prevalence |
| 41 | Stamford, CT | 76 | high basement prevalence |
| 42 | Albany, NY | 72 | high basement prevalence |
| 43 | Ann Arbor, MI | 72 | winter freeze–thaw |
| 44 | Aurora, IL | 72 | high basement prevalence |
| 45 | Buffalo, NY | 72 | high basement prevalence |
| 46 | Charleston, WV | 72 | heavy precipitation |
| 47 | Cleveland, OH | 72 | high basement prevalence |
| 48 | Cranston, RI | 72 | high basement prevalence |
| 49 | Dayton, OH | 72 | high basement prevalence |
| 50 | Erie, PA | 72 | high basement prevalence |
| 51 | Fort Wayne, IN | 72 | high basement prevalence |
| 52 | Harrisburg, PA | 72 | high basement prevalence |
| 53 | Huntington, WV | 72 | heavy precipitation |
| 54 | Indianapolis, IN | 72 | high basement prevalence |
| 55 | Jersey City, NJ | 72 | heavy precipitation |
| 56 | Kansas City, MO | 72 | expansive / clay soil |
| 57 | Louisville, KY | 72 | heavy precipitation |
| 58 | Naperville, IL | 72 | high basement prevalence |
| 59 | Omaha, NE | 72 | expansive / clay soil |
| 60 | Philadelphia, PA | 72 | high basement prevalence |
| 61 | Rochester, MN | 72 | winter freeze–thaw |
| 62 | Rochester, NY | 72 | high basement prevalence |
| 63 | Scranton, PA | 72 | high basement prevalence |
| 64 | South Bend, IN | 72 | high basement prevalence |
| 65 | Springfield, IL | 72 | high basement prevalence |
| 66 | Syracuse, NY | 72 | high basement prevalence |
| 67 | Toledo, OH | 72 | high basement prevalence |
| 68 | Warren, MI | 72 | winter freeze–thaw |
| 69 | Warwick, RI | 72 | high basement prevalence |
| 70 | Worcester, MA | 72 | high basement prevalence |
| 71 | Yonkers, NY | 72 | high basement prevalence |
| 72 | Akron, OH | 68 | high basement prevalence |
| 73 | Allentown, PA | 68 | high basement prevalence |
| 74 | Baltimore, MD | 68 | heavy precipitation |
| 75 | Billings, MT | 68 | expansive / clay soil |
| 76 | Bowling Green, KY | 68 | heavy precipitation |
| 77 | Bozeman, MT | 68 | expansive / clay soil |
| 78 | Canton, OH | 68 | high basement prevalence |
| 79 | Casper, WY | 68 | expansive / clay soil |
| 80 | Cheyenne, WY | 68 | expansive / clay soil |
| 81 | Columbia, MO | 68 | expansive / clay soil |
| 82 | Columbia, MD | 68 | heavy precipitation |
| 83 | Columbus, OH | 68 | high basement prevalence |
| 84 | Edison, NJ | 68 | heavy precipitation |
| 85 | Frederick, MD | 68 | heavy precipitation |
| 86 | Great Falls, MT | 68 | expansive / clay soil |
| 87 | Gulfport, MS | 68 | expansive / clay soil |
| 88 | Laramie, WY | 68 | expansive / clay soil |
| 89 | Lexington, KY | 68 | heavy precipitation |
| 90 | Lincoln, NE | 68 | expansive / clay soil |
| 91 | Missoula, MT | 68 | expansive / clay soil |
| 92 | Morgantown, WV | 68 | heavy precipitation |
| 93 | New Orleans, LA | 68 | expansive / clay soil |
| 94 | Newark, NJ | 68 | heavy precipitation |
| 95 | Rapid City, SD | 68 | winter freeze–thaw |
| 96 | Sioux Falls, SD | 68 | winter freeze–thaw |
| 97 | Springfield, MO | 68 | expansive / clay soil |
| 98 | Topeka, KS | 68 | expansive / clay soil |
| 99 | Trenton, NJ | 68 | heavy precipitation |
| 100 | Washington, DC | 68 | heavy precipitation |
| 101 | Aurora, CO | 64 | expansive / clay soil |
| 102 | Baton Rouge, LA | 64 | expansive / clay soil |
| 103 | Colorado Springs, CO | 64 | expansive / clay soil |
| 104 | Denver, CO | 64 | expansive / clay soil |
| 105 | Dover, DE | 64 | heavy precipitation |
| 106 | Fort Collins, CO | 64 | expansive / clay soil |
| 107 | Hattiesburg, MS | 64 | expansive / clay soil |
| 108 | Jackson, MS | 64 | expansive / clay soil |
| 109 | Juneau, AK | 64 | winter freeze–thaw |
| 110 | Lafayette, LA | 64 | expansive / clay soil |
| 111 | Newark, DE | 64 | heavy precipitation |
| 112 | Overland Park, KS | 64 | expansive / clay soil |
| 113 | Shreveport, LA | 64 | expansive / clay soil |
| 114 | Virginia Beach, VA | 64 | heavy precipitation |
| 115 | Wichita, KS | 64 | expansive / clay soil |
| 116 | Wilmington, DE | 64 | heavy precipitation |
| 117 | Alexandria, VA | 60 | heavy precipitation |
| 118 | Anchorage, AK | 60 | winter freeze–thaw |
| 119 | Boise, ID | 60 | winter freeze–thaw |
| 120 | Fairbanks, AK | 60 | winter freeze–thaw |
| 121 | Idaho Falls, ID | 60 | winter freeze–thaw |
| 122 | Mobile, AL | 60 | heavy precipitation |
| 123 | Nampa, ID | 60 | winter freeze–thaw |
| 124 | Norman, OK | 60 | expansive / clay soil |
| 125 | Oklahoma City, OK | 60 | expansive / clay soil |
| 126 | Richmond, VA | 60 | heavy precipitation |
| 127 | Roanoke, VA | 60 | heavy precipitation |
| 128 | Savannah, GA | 60 | heavy precipitation |
| 129 | Tulsa, OK | 60 | expansive / clay soil |
| 130 | Asheville, NC | 56 | heavy precipitation |
| 131 | Charlotte, NC | 56 | heavy precipitation |
| 132 | Fayetteville, AR | 56 | expansive / clay soil |
| 133 | Fort Smith, AR | 56 | expansive / clay soil |
| 134 | Greensboro, NC | 56 | heavy precipitation |
| 135 | Houston, TX | 56 | expansive / clay soil |
| 136 | Little Rock, AR | 56 | expansive / clay soil |
| 137 | Memphis, TN | 56 | heavy precipitation |
| 138 | Ogden, UT | 56 | high basement prevalence |
| 139 | Provo, UT | 56 | high basement prevalence |
| 140 | Raleigh, NC | 56 | heavy precipitation |
| 141 | Salt Lake City, UT | 56 | high basement prevalence |
| 142 | Atlanta, GA | 52 | heavy precipitation |
| 143 | Augusta, GA | 52 | heavy precipitation |
| 144 | Austin, TX | 52 | expansive / clay soil |
| 145 | Bellevue, WA | 52 | heavy precipitation |
| 146 | Birmingham, AL | 52 | heavy precipitation |
| 147 | Charleston, SC | 52 | heavy precipitation |
| 148 | Chattanooga, TN | 52 | heavy precipitation |
| 149 | Columbus, GA | 52 | heavy precipitation |
| 150 | Dallas, TX | 52 | expansive / clay soil |
| 151 | El Paso, TX | 52 | expansive / clay soil |
| 152 | Eugene, OR | 52 | heavy precipitation |
| 153 | Fort Worth, TX | 52 | expansive / clay soil |
| 154 | Huntsville, AL | 52 | heavy precipitation |
| 155 | Jacksonville, FL | 52 | heavy precipitation |
| 156 | Knoxville, TN | 52 | heavy precipitation |
| 157 | Miami, FL | 52 | heavy precipitation |
| 158 | Montgomery, AL | 52 | heavy precipitation |
| 159 | Nashville, TN | 52 | heavy precipitation |
| 160 | Orlando, FL | 52 | heavy precipitation |
| 161 | Portland, OR | 52 | heavy precipitation |
| 162 | Salem, OR | 52 | heavy precipitation |
| 163 | San Antonio, TX | 52 | expansive / clay soil |
| 164 | Seattle, WA | 52 | heavy precipitation |
| 165 | Spokane, WA | 52 | heavy precipitation |
| 166 | Tacoma, WA | 52 | heavy precipitation |
| 167 | Tampa, FL | 52 | heavy precipitation |
| 168 | Albuquerque, NM | 48 | expansive / clay soil |
| 169 | Columbia, SC | 48 | heavy precipitation |
| 170 | Greenville, SC | 48 | heavy precipitation |
| 171 | Hilo, HI | 48 | river / lake / flood proximity |
| 172 | Las Cruces, NM | 48 | expansive / clay soil |
| 173 | Rio Rancho, NM | 48 | expansive / clay soil |
| 174 | Santa Fe, NM | 48 | expansive / clay soil |
| 175 | Honolulu, HI | 44 | expansive / clay soil |
| 176 | Fresno, CA | 40 | expansive / clay soil |
| 177 | Henderson, NV | 40 | expansive / clay soil |
| 178 | Las Vegas, NV | 40 | expansive / clay soil |
| 179 | Los Angeles, CA | 40 | expansive / clay soil |
| 180 | Reno, NV | 40 | expansive / clay soil |
| 181 | Sacramento, CA | 40 | expansive / clay soil |
| 182 | San Diego, CA | 40 | expansive / clay soil |
| 183 | San Jose, CA | 40 | expansive / clay soil |
| 184 | Mesa, AZ | 36 | expansive / clay soil |
| 185 | Phoenix, AZ | 36 | expansive / clay soil |
| 186 | Scottsdale, AZ | 36 | expansive / clay soil |
| 187 | Tucson, AZ | 36 | expansive / clay soil |
See all statistics & sources →
Each metro is scored 1–5 on five factors drawn from public regional soil and climate data, then summed and scaled to 100: soil expansiveness, freeze–thaw severity, annual precipitation, basement prevalence, and water proximity.
Limitations: this is an awareness index built from regional characteristics, not official flood-zone data or a property-level rating. Scores are directional estimates for planning and education, not a substitute for a professional inspection.