It seems logical to think that bigger cities like Denver will, by default, have a higher number of car collisions.
More cars on the road = more collisions…makes sense right?
Well new data released by Allstate Insurance shows that a city’s population has little to no effect on the frequency of car collisions that occur. While some larger cities like New York do see a higher frequency of collisions, so do other cities with a fraction of the population.
Allstate’s report defines an auto collision as any incident involving a property damage claim.
Cities with the lowest frequency of auto collisions include:
- Sioux Falls, South Dakota
- Boise, Idaho
- Fort Collins, Colorado
Drivers in these respective cities went, on average, more than 13.5 years between crashes. Also, drivers were 27.6%, 27.3% and 26.7% less likely to have a collision when compared to the national average.
Cities with the highest frequency of crashes include:
- Washington, DC
- Baltimore, Maryland
- Providence, Rhode Island
Drivers in these cities had the shortest gap between auto collisions – 4.7, 5.3 and 5.5 years respectively.
Populations for each of the top and bottom 3 cities on this list have vary widely – from 146,000 residents to over 619,000.
The study by Allstate insurance looked at auto collision data from 195 cities with populations ranging from 125,000 to around 8 million. It’s interesting note from charts put together by Nate Berg over at the Atlantic that the highest populated city, New York, is on par with cities a fraction of its size in terms of auto collisions.
Likewise, there are small cities like Ft. Collins and others that are completely opposite and have a long period of time, over a decade in many cases, between car collisions.
When plotting Allstate’s data on a graph, it seems possible that a connection exists between larger populations and shorter time periods between crashes.
However, only 9 of the 195 cities evaluated in the study have populations over 1 million, so it can be a little misleading to suggest a larger city sees more car collisions.
But to consider the vast majority of cities on the list, another chart was plotted that only included cities with a population between 125,000 and 250,000 (…121 of 195 cities).
We see in this chart that there is obviously no discernible pattern. Some cities have a higher frequency of crashes than others, regardless of their population.
Even though data used in the study accounts for only 10% of the U.S. population, it’s still quite a representative example. If these numbers are indeed true, then it seems just because a city has a higher population doesn’t always mean it will see more car collisions.
We’re delighted to see Ft. Collins, Colorado was near the top of the list – congratulations! The mid-sized metropolis south of our Denver headquarters is one of the safest cities for driving in the entire U.S.!
