Personal incomes grew by 0.8% across the nation in 2013. While some metropolitan areas were among the largest contributors to the growth, in over 100 urban regions, incomes declined. The change in metropolitan area personal incomes ranged from an increase of 4.8% in Sioux City, a metro area on the border of Iowa, Nebraska, and South Dakota, to a decline of 3.1% in New Bern, North Carolina.

Based on recently released data from the Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA), 24/7 Wall St. reviewed the metropolitan statistical areas with the largest personal income growths, and the greatest declines. These are the cities where incomes are growing (and shrinking) the fastest.

Click here to see the 10 cities with growing incomes.

Click here to see the 10 cities with shrinking incomes.

Growth rates were calculated based on total real personal income — this includes compensation, income from property, minus contributions to the government — for all people in each city. Since growth rates were based on aggregate incomes, an increase in a city’s working-age population was often a major driver of growth. Nationwide, the number of working-age citizens remained essentially unchanged in 2013. In six of the cities where incomes grew the fastest, the working age population grew, contributing their incomes to those areas. In eight of the metros with shrinking incomes, on the other hand, the working-age populations remained flat or shrank.

Income growth is also strongly associated with economic expansion. Often, activity within a particular industry accounted for the bulk of the changes in total income generated in the area. With the exception of Danville, Illinois, the economies of all of the top 10 metro areas for income growth expanded faster than the nation’s 2013 GDP growth rate of 1.7%. The opposite was generally true for the cities with declining incomes.

The largest industry contributors to GDP growth varied considerably. In some cases, the largest contributors were sectors that traditionally have high-paying jobs. Professional and business services; finance, insurance, real estate, rental and leasing; and utilities jobs tend to pay higher wages than the average national wage. These three sectors were the largest contributors to economic growth in four of the 10 top cities for income growth.

To be sure, strong income growth is a healthy sign of the financial health of the area’s residents, just as a decline in personal income is generally a bad sign. However, strong income growth
in an area did not necessarily mean incomes were very high. In fact, per capita income did not exceed the national income figure of $41,706 in seven of the 10 cities with the fastest-growing incomes.

In the six years through 2013 that the BEA has tracked regional income, annual per capita income peaked in 2013 in nine of the top 10 cities for income growth. Provo-Orem, Utah, where per capita income peaked in 2008, was the only exception. For cities with shrinking incomes, personal incomes peaked in 2011, 2012, or in New Bern, North Carolina, as early as 2008.

In many of these areas, 2013 income changes have followed a longer, upward trend. With the exception of Danville, Illinois, personal income in all of the top 10 cities grew by at least 6.9% over the six year period from 2006 through 2013.The national growth over that time was 6.1%, in contrast.

Despite incomes shrinking in 2013 in all of the bottom 10 cities, most of these declines were relatively recent. Only two metro areas — Anniston-Oxford-Jacksonville, Alabama, and Rocky Mount, North Carolina — posted income declines over the longer, six year period through 2013. Three cities actually posted above-average income growths over that period.

To identify the cities where incomes are growing (and shrinking) the fastest, 24/7 Wall St. reviewed the highest and lowest real personal income growths in 2013 among the nation’s 381 metropolitan statistical areas (MSA) from the Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA). Real personal income, per capita income, GDP, and industry contributions to GDP growth in each MSA also came from the BEA. The BEA’s income figures for each year starting in 2008 — when regional data became available — were reviewed as well, all adjusted for inflation, chained to 2009 dollars. The share of an MSA’s workforce employed by each area’s industry in 2012 and 2013 came from the U.S. Census Bureau’s 2013 American Community Survey (ACS). Population growth, median household income, poverty rates, the percentage of households earning at least $200,000 and less than $10,000, and educational attainment rates also came from the ACS. Annual unemployment rates are for 2014 and came from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS).

These are the cities where incomes are growing (and shrinking) the fastest.

Cities Where Incomes are Growing the Fastest

10. Houma-Thibodaux, LA
> Income growth in 2013: 3.5%
> Income growth 2008-2013: 7.4%
> Per capita income: $47,983
> Annual unemployment rate: 4.8%

Incomes in the Houma-Thibodaux metro area increased 3.5% in 2013, the 10th largest growth rate nationwide. In contrast, personal income grew 0.8% across the country. A fast income growth does not necessarily mean those incomes are high, and most of the cities where incomes grew the fastest had relatively low per capita incomes. In the Houma-Thibodaux area, however, per capita income was $47,983, one of the highest income figures nationwide. As was the case nationwide, income growth was tied to economic expansion in the area. GDP grew by 6.8%, driven largely by the natural resource, mining, and transportation and utilities sectors. Like Louisiana as a whole, the oil and gas industry dominates Houma-Thibodaux’s economy, and is also a major employer. The area’s agriculture, forestry, fishing, and hunting and mining industry also employed 11% of the workforce, far higher than the share of the national workforce, at just 2%, employed in that sector.

ALSO READ: The 10 Most Oil-Rich States

9. St. George, UT
> Income growth in 2013: 3.7%
> Income growth 2008-2013: 13.2%
> Per capita income: $29,684
> Annual unemployment rate: 4.3%

Strong long-term income growth in the St. George metro area is tied to a relatively healthy economy and labor market, as well as strong population growth. Area incomes grew 13.2% over the six years through 2013, more than double the comparable national growth rate. The area’s unemployment was also just 4.3%, well below the nationwide rate of 6.2%. While the nation’s working-age population shrank slightly in 2013, it grew 2.7% in St. George, one of the larger growth rates compared to other metros — more people means more incomes, and an increase in the total income generated in the metro. GDP grew 5.9% in 2013, one of the higher rates. In contrast, the national economy expanded 1.7%. The traditionally high paying finance insurance, real estate, rental, and leasing industry was the largest contributor to St. George’s GDP growth, accounting for 2.43 percentage points of economic growth.

8. Provo-Orem, UT
> Income growth in 2013: 3.8%
> Income growth 2008-2013: 10.2%
> Per capita income: $27,760
> Annual unemployment rate: 3.5%

A statewide tech sector boom largely accounted for the strong income growth in the Provo-Orem metro area. Already in 2012, 2.5% of the area’s workforce was employed in information jobs, one of the higher shares in the country and higher than the national share of 2.1%. Although the share of tech jobs remained unchanged nationwide, in the Provo region, it increased to 2.9% in 2013, remaining one of the higher shares in the country. The startup culture and a high level of investment in the area has fueled other industries. GDP in Provo-Orem grew 6.4% in 2013, driven primarily by durable and nondurable manufacturing, as well as the trade sector. However, despite the income growth, the metro’s per capita income of $27,760 was still among the lowest personal incomes nationwide.

ALSO READ: 10 States With the Most Hate Groups

7. Merced, CA
> Income growth in 2013: 3.8%
> Income growth 2008-2013: 14.1%
> Per capita income: $31,153
> Annual unemployment rate: 12.8%

Cities where incomes grew the fastest in 2013 also have seen fast long-term income growth. In Merced, for example, incomes grew by 14.1% since 2008, the first year the BEA started publishing regional income data. This was more than double the national growth rate over that period. Merced’s economy is highly dependent on the agriculture, forestry, fishing, hunting and mining sector, which employed 13.1% of the area’s workforce, far higher than the nationwide share of 2%. The share of the workforce employed in the industry dropped slightly from 14.1% in 2012. While the area’s economy is largely based on agricultural activity, the natural resources and mining component of the sector also contributed to growth. Natural resources and mining accounted for 4.59 percentage points of Merced’s GDP growth of 4.5% in 2013. Despite the area’s economic growth, nearly 13% of the workforce was unemployed in 2014, one of the highest jobless rates nationwide.

6. Vallejo-Fairfield, CA
> Income growth in 2013: 3.9%
> Income growth 2008-2013: 7.3%
> Per capita income: $34,549
> Annual unemployment rate: 7.5%

Like most metro areas with strong income growth, the government sector was a drag on the economy of Vallejo-Fairfield, detracting 0.37 from GDP. Still, the economy grew by 3.8%, one of the faster growth rates nationwide. Personal income grew 2.8%, from $33,609 in 2012 to $34,549 in 2013. The Vallejo-Fairfield metro area economy grew 3.8% in 2013, well above the national growth rate of 1.7%. Nondurable goods manufacturing, which includes food and beverage, petroleum and coal products manufacturing, was the largest driver of growth in the area, adding 2.26 percentage points to GDP growth.

5. Boise City, ID
> Income growth in 2013: 3.9%
> Income growth 2008-2013: 8.6%
> Per capita income: $36,309
> Annual unemployment rate: 4.6%

Total income in Boise City made a sharp jump of nearly 4% in 2013. Many booming industries over the course of the year were likely fueled by the city’s 2.1% population growth. For example, the construction industry and the educational services, health care, and social assistance sector contributed to the metropolitan area’s economic growth by 0.47 and 0.41 percentage points, respectively. The income growth was also accompanied by a 1.18 percentage point contribution from the trade sector, the sixth fastest rate in the country. While the area’s total income increased in 2013, Boise’s per capita income remained among the lowest in the nation at just over $36,300.

4. Monroe, MI
> Income growth in 2013: 4.4%
> Income growth 2008-2013: 6.9%
> Per capita income: $38,681
> Annual unemployment rate: 6.1%

Michigan relies heavily on its manufacturing sector, and the Monroe metro area is no exception. Durable goods manufacturing was the largest contributor to economic growth in Monroe, accounting for 2.15 percentage points of the 5.5% GDP growth. This was also among the larger metro area economic expansions nationwide. In terms of employment, the industry also grew in 2013. Nearly 23% of the area’s workforce was employed in manufacturing, the 13th highest share, and up from 18.7% of the workforce in 2012.

ALSO READ: 20 Cities With the Widest Gap Between the Rich and Poor

3. Danville, IL
> Income growth in 2013: 4.4%
> Income growth 2008-2013: 3.0%
> Per capita income: $42,398
> Annual unemployment rate: 8.6%

While Danville had among the fastest income growth in the country in 2013, the Illinois metro area’s economy has not always been so robust. Income growth in every other fast-growing metro area outpaced the national growth rate of 6.1% from 2008 to through 2013. In Danville, however, incomes grew just 3% over that period. Still, on a per capita basis, incomes in Danville grew by 4.9% in 2013, faster than in any other metro. Unlike most other areas with fast-growing incomes, the area’s per capita income of $42,398 was higher than the national per capita income figure. Despite the strong income growth, the area’s unemployment rate of 8.6% was higher than the nationwide rate. However, Danville’s May unemployment rate of 6.1% a 2.3 percentage points decline, tied with Yuma, Arizona for the largest over-the-year unemployment rate drop.

2. Janesville-Beloit, WI
> Income growth in 2013: 4.6%
> Income growth 2008-2013: 9.6%
> Per capita income: $38,449
> Annual unemployment rate: 6.2%

Personal income grew 4.6% in Janesville-Beloit, trailing only Sioux City. Income growth is tied to the economic health of the region — the area’s economy expanded by 6%, more than three times faster the nationwide GDP growth of 1.7%. Economic growth was driven primarily by professional and business services, which contributed 2.61 percentage points to the overall growth. The sector also tends to provide relatively high-paying jobs. Despite the strong growth, the per capita income in Janesville-Beloit of $38,449 was below the nationwide per capita income of $41,706.

ALSO READ: The Most Expensive Town in Each State

1. Sioux City, IA-NE-SD
> Income growth in 2013: 4.8%
> Income growth 2008-2013: 10.2%
> Per capita income: $45,500
> Annual unemployment rate: 4.4%

Personal income grew faster in the Sioux City metro area than in any other metro area in the country. In 2013, $7.7 billion of income was generated in the area, up 4.8% from $7.3 billion in 2012. Unlike most other areas with strong income growth, Sioux City incomes are both fast-growing and relatively high. The area’s per capita income of $45,500 was well above the national figure of $41,706. Area residents also benefited from a relatively low unemployment rate of 4.4% last year. Sioux City’s population is also booming. While the U.S. population grew by 0.7% in 2013, Sioux City’s grew by 16.8%, the 16th fastest growth rate in the country. The manufacturing sector employed 18.3% of the area’s workforce, one of the highest shares in the nation.

Click here to see the 10 cities with income declines.

Cities Where Incomes are Shrinking the Fastest

10. Bay City, MI
> Income growth in 2013: -2.0%
> Income growth 2008-2013: 1.2%
> Per capita income: $36,590
> Annual unemployment rate: 7.1%

Personal income in Bay City fell 2% in 2013, the 10th largest decline nationwide of any metropolitan area. The area’s manufacturing sector employed 14.2% of the area’s workforce, well above the share of U.S. workers employed in the sector and the second-largest percentage of other sectors in the area. Sector wages likely contributed to the overall income drop as the durable goods manufacturing sector was a drag on economic growth, subtracting 0.73 percentage points from the GDP growth rate of 2.3%.

9. Rocky Mount, NC
> Income growth in 2013: -2.0%
> Income growth 2008-2013: -2.6%
> Per capita income: $36,307
> Annual unemployment rate: 8.6%

In many of the cities where incomes fell the most, long-term income trends were actually positive. In Rocky Mount, however, personal income dropped 2.6% from 2008 through 2013, one of the largest such declines. In contrast, incomes nationwide grew by 6.1% over that period. Like a majority of cities with shrinking incomes, the poor income growth in Rocky Mount may be tied to a relatively weak labor market — 8.6% of the area’s workforce was unemployed in 2014, one of the highest unemployment rates nationwide.

ALSO READ: 10 Cities With the Most Adultery

8. Williamsport, PA
> Income growth in 2013: -2.0%
> Income growth 2008-2013: 10.8%
> Per capita income: $38,740
> Annual unemployment rate: 6.1%

Weak income growth has typically been part of a long-term pattern in most of the cities with the fastest-shrinking incomes. However, even while the Williamsport metro area’s total generated personal income fell by 2% to $4.5 billion in 2013, incomes were actually up 10.8% from 2008. This was well above the national income growth of 6.1% over that period and a particularly strong growth compared with other cities with shrinking incomes in 2013.

7. Watertown-Fort Drum, NY
> Income growth in 2013: -2.1%
> Income growth 2008-2013: 4.8%
> Per capita income: $42,705
> Annual unemployment rate: 7.6%

Upstate New York’s Watertown-Fort Drum metro area is home to the base of the U.S. Army’s 10th Mountain Division. Like many towns heavily reliant on the military, major cuts to garrison size can decimate a region. Fort Drum survived the most recent budget cuts relatively unscathed, yet the region still has gone through hard times. Real income fell by 2.1% in 2013, compared to the national income growth of 0.8%. In the same period, Watertown’s GDP fell by 2.6%, while national GDP rose by 1.7%. The metro area’s unemployment rate improved from 2012 to 2013, but at a slower rate than in the rest of the country. Watertown had 9.9% unemployment in 2012, compared to the national rate of 8.1%. In 2013, the metro area unemployment fell slightly to 9.3%, relative to the U.S. rate of 7.4%.

ALSO READ: States Drinking the Most Beer

6. Grand Forks, ND-MN
> Income growth in 2013: -2.3%
> Income growth 2008-2013: 11.9%
> Per capita income: $43,580
> Annual unemployment rate: 3.4%

Personal income declined 2.3% in Grand Forks in 2013 versus the nationwide increase of 0.8%. However, incomes in the area rose 11.9% from 2008, nearly double the nationwide income growth rate for that period. Per capita income was $43,580, higher than the nationwide per capita income figure of $41,706. The area’s economy also expanded slightly faster than the nationwide rate, driven by 1.64 and 0.46 percentage point contributions from the natural resources and government sectors, respectively. While far from the state’s oil-producing areas, Grand Forks manufacturers related products such as oilfield tanks.

5. Anniston-Oxford-Jacksonville, AL
> Income growth in 2013: -2.4%
> Income growth 2008-2013: -5.1%
> Per capita income: $35,677
> Annual unemployment rate: 7.9%

Total income in the Anniston-Oxford-Jacksonville metro area dropped by 2.4% in 2013. Peaking at $37,656 in 2010, per capita income in the area dropped to $35,677 in 2013, the lowest level in five years. The professional and business services sector was the biggest drag on the economy, contributing -1.76 percentage points to the area’s total GDP decline of 3%. The durable goods manufacturing sector, meanwhile, provided the biggest boost, expanding the economy by 0.84 percentage points. Despite its contribution to economic growth, the manufacturing sector employed significantly fewer people in 2013 than it did the previous year. In 2013, 15.9% of the area’s workforce was employed in manufacturing, down from 21.6% in 2012. High poverty rates accompanied shrinking incomes in the area. The area had a poverty rate of 21.8%, well above the national rate of 15.8%. Also, 14% of area households earned less than $10,000, the eighth highest rate in the country.

4. Peoria, IL
> Income growth in 2013: -2.9%
> Income growth 2008-2013: 5.5%
> Per capita income: $46,692
> Annual unemployment rate: 7.2%

Shrinking incomes in Peoria were accompanied by the largest GDP drop in the country. Peoria’s GDP declined by 6.8%, a stark difference from the national 1.7% growth rate. The city also had a relatively high unemployment rate of 7.2% compared to a national jobless rate of 6.2%. The professional and business services industry was the largest drag on Peoria’s economy, detracting 0.94 percentage points from overall GDP. However, despite shrinking incomes, per capita income in Peoria was among the highest in the nation. At $46,692, Peoria residents earned about $5,000 more than the average American.

ALSO READ: The Worst Companies to Work For

3. Fairbanks, AK
> Income growth in 2013: -2.9%
> Income growth 2008-2013: 6.7%
> Per capita income: $39,694
> Annual unemployment rate: 5.7%

While income rose overall in Fairbanks in the five years from 2008 to 2013, it actually dropped by a precipitous 2.9% in 2013. Though some industries expanded in the metro area, it was not by enough to offset the economic contraction caused by others. For instance, nondurable goods manufacturing generated 1.32 percentage points of Fairbanks’ total GDP growth, a full percentage point more than the industry’s national average contribution. However, seven out of the area’s 11 industries shrank, including transportation and utilities, which reduced GDP by 2.23 percentage points. As was the case in most cities, government was also a drag on the economy, reducing GDP by over one percentage point.

2. Beckley, WV
> Income growth in 2013: -3.0%
> Income growth 2008-2013: 3.3%
> Per capita income: $42,982
> Annual unemployment rate: 7.5%

As in several other states with shrinking incomes, the Beckley metro area’s per capita income of $42,982 was still higher than the national average, despite a near-nation-leading decline in personal income. This is partly due to strong income growth over a longer period. From 2008 through 2013, the income generated in the area grew by 3.3%. The growth was weaker than the comparable nationwide growth rate but far better than the 3% decline in 2013. Conversely, Beckley’s economy grew 9.4%, the third largest growth rate nationwide and an unusually strong growth rate compared to other areas with shrinking incomes. Economic expansion was driven by the natural resources and mining industry, which contributed 11.49 percentage points — the largest contribution to a metro’s economy from that sector in the nation.

ALSO READ: States With the Fastest (and Slowest) Growing Economies

1. New Bern, NC
> Income growth in 2013: -3.1%
> Income growth 2008-2013: 0.0%
> Per capita income: $42,033
> Annual unemployment rate: 6.7%

Incomes declined faster in New Bern, North Carolina than anywhere else in the country. A New Bern resident took home an average of about $1,000 less in 2013 than in 2012. Shrinking income in New Bern was tied to a waning economy. Despite a 1.65 percentage point contribution to growth from the natural resources and mining sector, the economy shrank by 0.2%. Progress was significantly hindered by the government sector, which contributed a 1.14 percentage point drag on the economy, as well as the construction industry, which reduced the economy by nearly a quarter of a percentage point. Correspondingly, total income in the area declined by 3.1% in 2013, cancelling out all income growth from the previous five years. However, the area’s per capita income of $42,033 was still slightly higher than the corresponding national figure of $41,706.

Click here to see the 10 cities with growing incomes.

Thank you for reading! Have some feedback for us?
Contact the 24/7 Wall St. editorial team.