What WalletHub’s 2025 Retirement Rankings Mean for Texas Cities—and Why Trustees Should Pay Attention
Staying ahead of retirement trends isn’t just about portfolio returns—it’s also about understanding where retirees live and what factors shape their quality of life. WalletHub’s annual “Best & Worst Places to Retire” reports—covering both states and cities—offer a window into those realities.
For Texas, the results are mixed: in the 2025 Best & Worst States to Retire list, Texas ranked 26 out of 50 states, placing it in the middle of the pack nationally. And at the city level, only one Texas metro—Austin—landed in the top 25 retirement destinations.
How Texas Ranked as a State
Texas’ overall score was 52.37, with the following breakdown:
- Affordability: 20
- Quality of Life: 34
- Health Care: 35
This shows relative strength in affordability, but weaker performance on quality of life and health care. For retirees, that translates into mixed conditions depending on where in the state they settle.
How Texas Cities Fared
Austin ranked 25th overall among U.S. cities. Its breakdown:
- Affordability: 54
- Activities: 30
- Quality of Life: 78
- Health Care: 105
This puts Austin in the upper tier for cultural amenities and relative affordability, but well below average on health care access and quality of life for older adults.
Other large Texas metros, such as Houston, Dallas, and San Antonio, did not break into the top 25. Their absence reflects challenges in affordability, congestion, and health care capacity that mirror broader state-level results.
National Highlights for Context
While Texas is our focus, WalletHub’s national results show how other regions compare. The top-ranked city overall was Orlando, FL, followed by Scottsdale, AZ and Tampa, FL. At the state level, Florida ranked 1st, while Alaska ranked 50th.
At the other end, Stockton, CA, and Newark, NJ, were among the lowest-ranked cities, and states like New Jersey (47th) and Mississippi (48th) also struggled.
You can view the full lists here:
- WalletHub’s 2025 Best & Worst Places to Retire (Cities)
- WalletHub’s 2025 Best & Worst States to Retire
Why This Matters for TEXPERS System Members
The rankings are not just trivia—they highlight pressures that affect pensioners directly and shape the environment in which System Members are working to deliver retirement security.
- Affordability pressures: Rising housing and property tax costs in cities like Austin mean that even modest increases in living expenses can erode fixed pension benefits. For System Members, this underscores the importance of monitoring whether cost-of-living adjustments (COLAs) are sufficient to protect purchasing power.
- Health care challenges: Austin’s weak health care ranking and Texas’ statewide placement at 35th in health care illustrate a broader concern. Retirees may face higher out-of-pocket costs or limited access to providers, especially in rural areas. Trustees and administrators may want to explore supplemental benefit strategies or partnerships that help retirees bridge gaps in care.
- Migration & relocation: As affordability varies across Texas metros, retirees may choose to move within or out of the state. Understanding these relocation patterns can help System Members anticipate member service needs and ensure communications reach retirees wherever they reside.
- Quality of life considerations: With Texas ranked 34th in quality of life, factors like safety, walkability, and access to cultural amenities remain uneven across regions. Pension adequacy isn’t just about covering expenses—it’s about supporting a dignified, fulfilling retirement.
Actions for Trustees and Administrators to Consider
-
Track retiree demographics within your system
-
Many pension systems maintain contact databases and member surveys. Regularly updating this information can reveal relocation trends (e.g., retirees moving from metro centers to smaller towns). Trustees can request periodic reports from staff or actuaries to ensure these shifts are captured.
-
-
Monitor affordability metrics when evaluating plan policies
-
COLA discussions and actuarial reviews can incorporate local housing, property tax, and health care cost trends. Trustees can ask consultants to include regional cost-of-living data in their presentations so policy decisions are informed by where members actually live.
-
-
Evaluate supplemental programs through system partnerships
-
While most Texas pension systems do not provide retiree health care, trustees can share best practices with peers or explore whether member associations, local governments, or affinity programs offer group-rate insurance or wellness initiatives.
-
-
Engage in policy advocacy via TEXPERS and local officials
-
Trustees and administrators can raise awareness about how issues such as property tax relief, affordable housing, and health care access affect retirees. These conversations can happen within TEXPERS’ legislative advocacy workshops, at city council or county hearings, or through outreach to state representatives.
-
The Bottom Line
Texas’ state-level ranking (26th) and its limited city-level presence (with only Austin in the top 25) underscore the mixed environment retirees face. For TEXPERS System Members, the lesson is clear: the benefits you oversee are only as strong as the environments in which retirees live. Monitoring affordability, health care, and migration trends is key to ensuring that pension security translates into real retirement security.
About the Author: Allen Jones is the director of communications and event marketing for TEXPERS. He joined the Association in 2017. Before TEXPERS, he worked in the news media industry, producing content for newspapers, magazines, and online publications and leading newsrooms as an editor and publications manager. [email protected]
FOLLOW TEXPERS ON FACEBOOK, X, THREADS, AND LINKEDIN FOR THE LATEST NEWS ABOUT TEXAS' PUBLIC PENSION INDUSTRY.
Editor’s Note: This article was prepared with the assistance of artificial intelligence tools to support research, fact-checking, and formatting. Final content decisions, including writing, editing, and publication, were completed by TEXPERS staff.


