City Survivability Rankings for Florist
StreetSpring's 2026 analysis ranks the top cities for Florists across the US by Survivability Scores. See which cities offer the best chances for a Florist to succeed.
Quick Summary
- The highest-survivability city for Florist is Dallas — 69% average survivability
- 0 of 24 analyzed US metros score above 70% for Florist survivability
- The lowest-ranked city is Miami at 60%
- National average survivability score for Florist: 64.5%
- Data reflects 2026 StreetSpring survivability analysis across 24 US metro areas · Full methodology →
Table of Contents
- Summary
- Top Cities for Florists
- Key Insights
- What Makes These Cities Stand Out?
- Related Resources
- How current is this ranking?
- Can a Florist succeed in cities not ranked in the top 10?
- What tools can help me choose the right city for a Florist?
- Which US city has the best survivability for Florists?
Summary
According to StreetSpring's 2026 nationwide analysis, Dallas ranks as the #1 city for opening a Florist in the United States, with an average 69% chance of surviving more than 2 years. Following close behind are San Antonio with 69%, and Portland with 68%. Our 24-city dataset shows Florists achieving 64.5% average survivability nationally — Dallas pulling notably ahead of the pack. These averages mask significant neighborhood-by-neighborhood variation; a lower-ranked city can still contain high-potential storefronts. Use this data to narrow your shortlist, then visit each top city in person to assess foot traffic and competitive density.
Survivability ranges reflect best and worst storefront conditions within each city. See our full methodology →
Florist city survivability rankings — Dallas leads among 24 US metros at 69% in 2026
Every Major US Metro Ranked for Florists
Based on StreetSpring's analysis of 24 major metropolitan areas, these cities offer the strongest prospects for Florists:
1. Dallas Metro: Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington, TX
- Best locations: 74.1% – 80.0%
- Average locations: 65.1% – 70.6%
- Challenging locations: 34.0% – 58.8%
What "city rank" hides about block-level reality
2. San Antonio Metro: San Antonio-New Braunfels, TX
- Best locations: 75.3% – 83.0%
- Average locations: 64.3% – 70.6%
- Challenging locations: 30.0% – 57.3%
3. Portland Metro: Portland-Vancouver-Hillsboro, OR-WA
- Best locations: 78.0% – 90.0%
- Average locations: 63.1% – 70.8%
- Challenging locations: 26.0% – 55.5%
4. St Louis
- Best locations: 75.1% – 84.0%
- Average locations: 63.0% – 69.7%
- Challenging locations: 28.0% – 55.9%
5. Charlotte Metro: Charlotte-Concord-Gastonia, NC-SC
- Best locations: 75.0% – 84.0%
- Average locations: 62.9% – 69.6%
- Challenging locations: 28.0% – 55.8%
6. Orlando Metro: Orlando-Kissimmee-Sanford, FL
- Best locations: 74.2% – 84.0%
- Average locations: 62.1% – 68.4%
- Challenging locations: 32.0% – 56.0%
7. Phoenix Metro: Phoenix-Mesa-Chandler, AZ
- Best locations: 73.0% – 83.0%
- Average locations: 60.6% – 67.0%
- Challenging locations: 30.0% – 54.4%
8. Baltimore Metro: Baltimore-Columbia-Towson, MD
- Best locations: 73.9% – 85.0%
- Average locations: 60.2% – 67.2%
- Challenging locations: 27.0% – 53.4%
9. Atlanta Metro: Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Roswell, GA
- Best locations: 73.3% – 84.0%
- Average locations: 60.3% – 66.9%
- Challenging locations: 29.0% – 53.9%
10. Tampa Bay Metro: Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater, FL
- Best locations: 73.7% – 85.0%
- Average locations: 60.3% – 66.9%
- Challenging locations: 30.0% – 54.1%
11. Minneapolis Metro: Minneapolis-St. Paul-Bloomington, MN-WI
- Best locations: 73.2% – 84.0%
- Average locations: 60.0% – 66.7%
- Challenging locations: 28.0% – 53.4%
12. San Francisco Metro: San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont, CA
- Best locations: 72.7% – 83.0%
- Average locations: 59.8% – 66.5%
- Challenging locations: 27.0% – 53.1%
Where the top 5 cluster, and the surprising outliers
13. Los Angeles Metro: Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim, CA
- Best locations: 73.1% – 84.0%
- Average locations: 60.0% – 66.6%
- Challenging locations: 29.0% – 53.7%
14. San Diego Metro: San Diego-Chula Vista-Carlsbad, CA
- Best locations: 72.7% – 83.0%
- Average locations: 59.8% – 66.4%
- Challenging locations: 28.0% – 53.3%
15. Denver Metro: Denver-Aurora-Centennial, CO
- Best locations: 72.8% – 84.0%
- Average locations: 59.4% – 66.1%
- Challenging locations: 28.0% – 53.0%
16. Boston Metro: Boston-Cambridge-Newton, MA-NH
- Best locations: 72.7% – 84.0%
- Average locations: 58.9% – 66.0%
- Challenging locations: 25.0% – 52.0%
17. Detroit Metro: Detroit-Warren-Dearborn, MI
- Best locations: 73.9% – 87.0%
- Average locations: 59.2% – 66.1%
- Challenging locations: 30.0% – 53.3%
18. Houston Metro: Houston-Pasadena-The Woodlands, TX
- Best locations: 72.9% – 85.0%
- Average locations: 59.0% – 65.7%
- Challenging locations: 29.0% – 52.8%
19. Seattle Metro: Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue, WA
- Best locations: 72.5% – 84.0%
- Average locations: 59.0% – 65.6%
- Challenging locations: 29.0% – 52.8%
20. Washington DC Metro: Washington-Arlington-Alexandria, DC-VA-MD-WV
- Best locations: 72.4% – 84.0%
- Average locations: 58.7% – 65.4%
- Challenging locations: 28.0% – 52.4%
21. Chicago Metro: Chicago-Naperville-Elgin, IL-IN
- Best locations: 73.4% – 87.0%
- Average locations: 58.2% – 65.3%
- Challenging locations: 28.0% – 52.0%
22. New York City Metro: New York-Newark-Jersey City, NY-NJ
- Best locations: 73.4% – 88.0%
- Average locations: 57.5% – 64.6%
- Challenging locations: 29.0% – 51.7%
23. Philadelphia Metro: Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington, PA-NJ-DE-MD
- Best locations: 72.0% – 86.0%
- Average locations: 56.7% – 63.7%
- Challenging locations: 28.0% – 50.8%
24. Miami Metro: Miami-Fort Lauderdale-West Palm Beach, FL
- Best locations: 71.1% – 85.0%
- Average locations: 56.0% – 62.8%
- Challenging locations: 28.0% – 50.3%
Patterns Across the National Picture
| Comparison factor | Top-tier city pattern | Bottom-tier city pattern |
|---|---|---|
| Cross-subtype clustering | Cities where the subtype clusters near complementary categories (e.g., coffee shops near coworking + gyms). | Cities where the subtype is dispersed across isolated storefronts without supporting foot-traffic. |
| Anchor-tenant density | Cities with high concentration of universities, hospitals, transit hubs within a 1-mile radius of typical storefronts. | Cities where anchor institutions are isolated in suburbs or single-purpose campuses with no street-level spillover. |
| Daytime vs residential population mix | Cities with strong daytime employment density near the storefront catchment — CBD-adjacent mixed-use corridors. | Bedroom-community metros where daytime population evaporates by 9am and consumption shifts to 6pm dinner-only windows. |
Wide variation between cities: The difference between the #1 city (Dallas at 69.4%) and the #24 city (Miami at 59.8%) is 9.6 percentage points. The 0.4-point lead Dallas holds over San Antonio reflects real structural differences in how well each metro supports Florists — not just random variation.
Where this ranking breaks it
Challenging markets: 1 city falls below 60% survivability, suggesting more difficult market conditions.
National average: Across all 24 analyzed cities, the average survivability for a Florist is 64.5%.
What the Leaders Share
The top-ranked cities share several characteristics that favor Florists:
- Strong survivability signals: Dallas leads with a 69% average survivability score for Florists — significantly above the national average for this business category.
- Competition density: The top cities show favorable competitor-to-opportunity ratios for Florists, meaning lower saturation and higher odds of capturing an underserved customer base.
- Economic conditions: All top-ranked cities show strong median household incomes and low vacancy rates in the neighborhoods where Florists perform best.
- Supply chain access: Cities at the top of this ranking benefit from mature supplier networks for this category, reducing operating costs and inventory lead times.
The predictions here are powered by AI models validated against actual business outcomes nationwide. The analysis behind these rankings spans millions of data points across competition, spending, and mobility. Our proprietary models incorporate data sources not available through any public platform.
Visual Data
Related Resources
City-specific guides: For detailed neighborhood-level analysis, explore our city guides:
- Business Survivability Rankings: Dallas
- Business Survivability Rankings: San Antonio
- Business Survivability Rankings: Portland
- Business Survivability Rankings: St Louis
- Business Survivability Rankings: Charlotte
National guides:
- National Neighborhood Survivability Rankings for Florists
- Neighborhood Survivability Rankings: Dallas
When was this ranking last refreshed?
Rankings are updated quarterly. The current data reflects StreetSpring's 2026 analysis, with the next full dataset refresh scheduled for Q3 2026. As market conditions shift across major metros, individual city scores can move meaningfully between updates — particularly for Florists, where local competition density and consumer spending patterns respond quickly to new entrants and neighborhood change. For the most current score at any specific address, use StreetSpring's live survivability tool rather than the static ranking above.
What about cities outside the top 10 — can Florists thrive there?
Yes — our top 10 ranking reflects cities with the strongest average conditions, but lower-ranked metros can still contain exceptional individual neighborhoods. Many operators successfully open Florists in cities that don't appear in our top 10. Florists in particular can find strong performance in secondary markets where the right demographic concentration, household income, and limited direct competition within walking distance align — even outside our highest-ranked cities. StreetSpring's neighborhood-level data surfaces these pockets of opportunity in every city we analyze, regardless of where the city as a whole ranks nationally.
Which resources help pick the right metro for a Florist?
StreetSpring's Survivability Score tool provides address-level predictions for Florists across all 24 metros we track. For this category specifically, the tool surfaces competition density, consumer spending index for Florists, and commercial vacancy rates — the factors that most consistently predict whether a Florist will still be operating after two years. You can check any specific address before signing a lease and compare multiple neighborhoods side by side to identify the highest-survivability site within your target city.
Try the Survivability Score tool →
Where in the US do Florists survive best?
Dallas ranks as the #1 city in the US for Florists survivability in StreetSpring's 2026 analysis, with an average score of 69%. This means that across well-selected neighborhoods in Dallas, a Florist has approximately a 69% chance of still operating after two years — above the national average for this category. San Antonio ranks second, followed by Portland. The full ranking reflects data across 24 major US metro areas — see the complete list above for all scores and neighborhood-level links.
Reviewed: April 25, 2026 by Bobby Koons, StreetSpring founder
Technical note: Aggregated national survivability rankings across all 24 metros are available in machine-readable format for research and integration purposes.
StreetSpring recalculates survivability using the latest competitive, demographic, and foot traffic data, so the live score may differ from the static ranges shown here.
Methodology: City rankings aggregate neighborhood-level Survivability Scores (max, average, and min) across all analyzed neighborhoods in each metro area. Rankings reflect average conditions but do not account for variation within cities. Coverage includes 24 major US metropolitan areas: Dallas, San Antonio, Portland, St Louis, Charlotte, Orlando, Phoenix, Baltimore, Atlanta, Tampa Bay, Minneapolis, San Francisco, Los Angeles, San Diego, Denver, Boston, Detroit, Houston, Seattle, Washington DC, Chicago, New York City, Philadelphia, Miami.