Skip to main content

Main Area

Main

26 worst states for singles

  • 1/ Jim Cheney // Shutterstock

    Worst states for singles

    When you’ve done all you can to put yourself out there —downloading the hottest dating apps, frequenting the trendiest bars, finding that perfect haircut — dating can feel like a fruitless endeavor. But what many tend to forget is how much location and economy plays into a successful dating pool. In the end, much of it is a numbers game — the more single people you meet, the higher the chances you’ll find a match. The more affordable activities like seeing a movie and grabbing a meal are available, the more likely people will be motivated to participate in the dating scene. When it comes to dating, not all places are created equal.

    To identify the worst states for singles looking for love, Stacker looked to WalletHub’s 2017 Best and Worst Cities for Singles, which ranked all 50 states and the District of Columbia “across 23 key indicators of dating-friendliness.” These indicators included factors such as “economics,” “fun and recreation,” and “dating opportunities.” Here are the bottom 26 states in the country — where riding off into the sunset may be a bit more of a long shot.

  • 2/ 12019 // Pixabay

    #26. Massachusetts

    Total score: 44.0

    ‘Dating opportunities’ rank: 18.0

    ‘Dating Economics’ Rank34.0

    ‘Romance & Fun’ Rank15.0

  • 3/ 12019 // Pixabay

    #25. Michigan

    Total score: 43.4

    ‘Dating opportunities’ rank: 13.0

    ‘Dating Economics’ Rank26.0

    ‘Romance & Fun’ Rank43.0

  • 4/ 12019 // Pixabay

    #24. Missouri

    Total score: 42.6

    ‘Dating opportunities’ rank: 29.0

    ‘Dating Economics’ Rank18.0

    ‘Romance & Fun’ Rank24.0

  • 5/ Fotocitizen // Pixabay

    #23. Virginia

    Total score: 42.5

    ‘Dating opportunities’ rank: 17.0

    ‘Dating Economics’ Rank20.0

    ‘Romance & Fun’ Rank35.0

  • 6/ 12019 // Pixabay

    #22. Ohio

    Total score: 42.3

    ‘Dating opportunities’ rank: 20.0

    ‘Dating Economics’ Rank23.0

    ‘Romance & Fun’ Rank32.0

  • 7/ 12019 // Pixabay

    #21. Maine

    Total score: 41.9

    ‘Dating opportunities’ rank: 46.0

    ‘Dating Economics’ Rank21.0

    ‘Romance & Fun’ Rank3.0

  • 8/ 12019 // Pixabay

    #20. Indiana

    Total score: 41.5

    ‘Dating opportunities’ rank: 25.0

    ‘Dating Economics’ Rank14.0

    ‘Romance & Fun’ Rank36.0

  • 9/ Makalu // Pixabay

    #19. Georgia

    Total score: 40.9

    ‘Dating opportunities’ rank: 14.0

    ‘Dating Economics’ Rank38.0

    ‘Romance & Fun’ Rank41.0

  • 10/ 12019 // Pixabay

    #18. New Jersey

    Total score: 39.5

    ‘Dating opportunities’ rank: 23.0

    ‘Dating Economics’ Rank29.0

    ‘Romance & Fun’ Rank37.0

  • 11/ 12019 // Pixabay

    #17. Oklahoma

    Total score: 39.2

    ‘Dating opportunities’ rank: 33.0

    ‘Dating Economics’ Rank13.0

    ‘Romance & Fun’ Rank40.0

  • 12/ 12019 // Pixabay

    #16. North Carolina

    Total score: 38.9

    ‘Dating opportunities’ rank: 27.0

    ‘Dating Economics’ Rank24.0

    ‘Romance & Fun’ Rank38.0

  • 13/ 12019 // Pixabay

    #15. Connecticut

    Total score: 38.6

    ‘Dating opportunities’ rank: 36.0

    ‘Dating Economics’ Rank45.0

    ‘Romance & Fun’ Rank17.0

  • 14/ Jennifer // Flickr

    #14. Kansas

    Total score: 38.1

    ‘Dating opportunities’ rank: 28.0

    ‘Dating Economics’ Rank12.0

    ‘Romance & Fun’ Rank49.0

  • 15/ Good Free Photos

    #13. Rhode Island

    Total score: 37.8

    ‘Dating opportunities’ rank: 43.0

    ‘Dating Economics’ Rank39.0

    ‘Romance & Fun’ Rank12.0

  • 16/ wezlo // Pixabay

    #12. Delaware

    Total score: 37.3

    ‘Dating opportunities’ rank: 45.0

    ‘Dating Economics’ Rank22.0

    ‘Romance & Fun’ Rank22.0

  • 17/ USA-Reiseblogger // Pixabay

    #11. Louisiana

    Total score: 37.2

    ‘Dating opportunities’ rank: 41.0

    ‘Dating Economics’ Rank28.0

    ‘Romance & Fun’ Rank31.0

  • 18/ 12019 // Pixabay

    #10. Maryland

    Total score: 37.1

    ‘Dating opportunities’ rank: 31.0

    ‘Dating Economics’ Rank27.0

    ‘Romance & Fun’ Rank39.0

  • 19/ 12019 // Pixabay

    #9. Tennessee

    Total score: 36.5

    ‘Dating opportunities’ rank: 39.0

    ‘Dating Economics’ Rank32.0

    ‘Romance & Fun’ Rank33.0

  • 20/ dennisflarsen // Pixabay

    #8. South Carolina

    Total score: 35.8

    ‘Dating opportunities’ rank: 44.0

    ‘Dating Economics’ Rank25.0

    ‘Romance & Fun’ Rank29.0

  • 21/ keiblack // Pixabay

    #7. New Mexico

    Total score: 35.7

    ‘Dating opportunities’ rank: 30.0

    ‘Dating Economics’ Rank36.0

    ‘Romance & Fun’ Rank46.0

  • 22/ emilyd3 // Pixabay

    #6. Kentucky

    Total score: 33.8

    ‘Dating opportunities’ rank: 42.0

    ‘Dating Economics’ Rank31.0

    ‘Romance & Fun’ Rank44.0

  • 23/ Schmid-Reportagen // Pixabay

    #5. Alaska

    Total score: 33.6

    ‘Dating opportunities’ rank: 49.0

    ‘Dating Economics’ Rank43.0

    ‘Romance & Fun’ Rank21.0

  • 24/ 12019 // Pixabay

    #4. West Virginia

    Total score: 30.6

    ‘Dating opportunities’ rank: 47.0

    ‘Dating Economics’ Rank47.0

    ‘Romance & Fun’ Rank34.0

  • 25/ 12019 // Pixabay

    #3. Arkansas

    Total score: 28.8

    ‘Dating opportunities’ rank: 50.0

    ‘Dating Economics’ Rank41.0

    ‘Romance & Fun’ Rank48.0

  • 26/ 12019 // Pixabay

    #2. Alabama

    Total score: 28.7

    ‘Dating opportunities’ rank: 48.0

    ‘Dating Economics’ Rank33.0

    ‘Romance & Fun’ Rank50.0

  • 27/ Goodfreephotos_com // Pixabay

    #1. Mississippi

    Total score: 25.9

    ‘Dating opportunities’ rank: 51.0

    ‘Dating Economics’ Rank42.0

    ‘Romance & Fun’ Rank51.0

2017 All rights reserved.