All 64 counties · Shares from 15.9% to 35.3% · Employment data 2025
Colorado counties
Explore the share of local jobs in occupations with high or substantial overlap in the 2023 task ratings. Use the table to find a county, or switch between job-sized and geographic views below. These are estimates, not forecasts of job losses.
Plate I
All 64 counties
Sorted by the share of jobs in high- or substantial-overlap occupations (score ≥ 45 of 100, 2025 employment). The tier mix bar shows each county's jobs across all four tiers — high, substantial, some, little overlap, most exposed first. The text-only bands compare with the typical (median) county. Map colors use Colorado overall instead — why these comparisons differ. The “≥50 cut (v1.1)” column is the former binary threshold, kept for continuity as an alternative cut. Select a column header to sort.
| County | Typical-county band | High + substantial share score ≥ 45 of 100 | Tier mix high · substantial · some · little | High + substantial jobs | UI-covered jobs | ≥50 cut (v1.1) former high-exposure share, alternative cut | Score 0–100 mean; see methodology | Rank by score orders the score column, not the share |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Broomfield | Well above typical | 35.3% | high overlap 8.1%, substantial overlap 27.1%, some overlap 27.9%, little overlap 36.9% | 14,367 | 40,750 | 30.2% | 35.2 | 1 |
| Denver | Well above typical | 33.1% | high overlap 7.5%, substantial overlap 25.7%, some overlap 25.6%, little overlap 41.2% | 185,864 | 560,749 | 27.5% | 33.5 | 3 |
| Boulder | Well above typical | 32.6% | high overlap 7.2%, substantial overlap 25.4%, some overlap 31.0%, little overlap 36.4% | 62,359 | 191,474 | 27.5% | 34.6 | 2 |
| Arapahoe | Well above typical | 31.0% | high overlap 7.2%, substantial overlap 23.8%, some overlap 27.7%, little overlap 41.3% | 105,532 | 340,882 | 26.1% | 33.0 | 5 |
| Douglas | Well above typical | 30.8% | high overlap 7.4%, substantial overlap 23.4%, some overlap 29.5%, little overlap 39.7% | 46,029 | 149,574 | 26.3% | 33.3 | 4 |
| Crowley | Well above typical Heavily imputed | 28.8% | high overlap 5.9%, substantial overlap 22.9%, some overlap 26.1%, little overlap 45.1% | 322 | 1,121 | 24.1% | 31.5 | —† |
| Jefferson | Well above typical | 27.1% | high overlap 5.9%, substantial overlap 21.2%, some overlap 28.4%, little overlap 44.5% | 67,103 | 247,212 | 22.8% | 31.3 | 9 |
| El Paso | Well above typical | 26.4% | high overlap 6.0%, substantial overlap 20.4%, some overlap 29.7%, little overlap 43.9% | 81,447 | 308,056 | 22.2% | 31.4 | 8 |
| Bent | Well above typical Heavily imputed | 25.3% | high overlap 5.0%, substantial overlap 20.3%, some overlap 30.7%, little overlap 44.0% | 296 | 1,172 | 21.3% | 30.8 | —† |
| Larimer | Well above typical | 24.7% | high overlap 5.6%, substantial overlap 19.1%, some overlap 29.4%, little overlap 45.9% | 42,348 | 171,290 | 20.9% | 30.5 | 14 |
| Dolores | Well above typical Heavily imputed | 24.5% | high overlap 5.0%, substantial overlap 19.5%, some overlap 33.3%, little overlap 42.2% | 129 | 526 | 20.1% | 31.2 | —† |
| Mineral | Well above typical Heavily imputed | 24.0% | high overlap 5.0%, substantial overlap 19.0%, some overlap 29.8%, little overlap 46.2% | 146 | 607 | 20.3% | 30.0 | —† |
| Park | Well above typical | 23.9% | high overlap 5.4%, substantial overlap 18.4%, some overlap 30.2%, little overlap 46.0% | 745 | 3,123 | 20.3% | 30.2 | 15 |
| La Plata | Above typical | 23.4% | high overlap 5.3%, substantial overlap 18.1%, some overlap 28.8%, little overlap 47.8% | 6,390 | 27,323 | 19.6% | 29.7 | 17 |
| Lincoln | Above typical Partially imputed | 23.4% | high overlap 5.3%, substantial overlap 18.1%, some overlap 31.5%, little overlap 45.1% | 513 | 2,191 | 19.5% | 30.6 | —† |
| Lake | Above typical Heavily imputed | 23.3% | high overlap 4.6%, substantial overlap 18.7%, some overlap 27.6%, little overlap 49.1% | 691 | 2,963 | 19.3% | 29.5 | —† |
| Hinsdale | Above typical Partially imputed | 23.1% | high overlap 5.1%, substantial overlap 18.0%, some overlap 27.5%, little overlap 49.4% | 70 | 302 | 19.2% | 29.6 | —† |
| Adams | Above typical | 22.4% | high overlap 5.9%, substantial overlap 16.5%, some overlap 26.1%, little overlap 51.5% | 55,827 | 249,651 | 19.0% | 28.5 | 40 |
| Elbert | Above typical | 22.4% | high overlap 4.6%, substantial overlap 17.8%, some overlap 27.9%, little overlap 49.7% | 1,149 | 5,141 | 18.5% | 28.2 | 48 |
| Fremont | Above typical | 22.4% | high overlap 4.7%, substantial overlap 17.7%, some overlap 28.6%, little overlap 49.0% | 3,260 | 14,529 | 18.7% | 29.5 | 22 |
| Alamosa | Above typical Partially imputed | 21.8% | high overlap 4.9%, substantial overlap 16.9%, some overlap 31.0%, little overlap 47.2% | 1,778 | 8,171 | 18.1% | 29.5 | —† |
| Logan | Above typical Partially imputed | 21.8% | high overlap 4.9%, substantial overlap 16.9%, some overlap 29.3%, little overlap 48.9% | 1,696 | 7,773 | 18.3% | 29.1 | —† |
| Custer | Above typical Heavily imputed | 21.7% | high overlap 4.7%, substantial overlap 17.0%, some overlap 30.5%, little overlap 47.8% | 222 | 1,026 | 18.2% | 29.3 | —† |
| Teller | Above typical Partially imputed | 21.7% | high overlap 4.6%, substantial overlap 17.1%, some overlap 30.1%, little overlap 48.2% | 1,761 | 8,108 | 18.4% | 29.5 | —† |
| Clear Creek | Above typical Heavily imputed | 21.6% | high overlap 5.4%, substantial overlap 16.3%, some overlap 28.1%, little overlap 50.2% | 742 | 3,430 | 18.7% | 29.4 | —† |
| Rio Blanco | Above typical Heavily imputed | 21.6% | high overlap 4.3%, substantial overlap 17.3%, some overlap 31.2%, little overlap 47.2% | 616 | 2,858 | 17.9% | 29.0 | —† |
| Cheyenne | About typical Heavily imputed | 21.5% | high overlap 4.5%, substantial overlap 17.0%, some overlap 28.4%, little overlap 50.1% | 154 | 717 | 18.1% | 28.3 | —† |
| Jackson | About typical Heavily imputed | 21.5% | high overlap 4.2%, substantial overlap 17.3%, some overlap 30.4%, little overlap 48.1% | 120 | 558 | 18.0% | 29.0 | —† |
| Ouray | About typical Heavily imputed | 21.5% | high overlap 4.6%, substantial overlap 16.9%, some overlap 26.3%, little overlap 52.2% | 471 | 2,192 | 17.9% | 28.2 | —† |
| Costilla | About typical Heavily imputed | 21.4% | high overlap 4.8%, substantial overlap 16.7%, some overlap 28.6%, little overlap 49.9% | 198 | 925 | 17.9% | 28.2 | —† |
| Baca | About typical Partially imputed | 21.3% | high overlap 5.0%, substantial overlap 16.4%, some overlap 36.3%, little overlap 42.3% | 248 | 1,164 | 17.8% | 30.5 | —† |
| Kiowa | About typical Partially imputed | 21.3% | high overlap 4.8%, substantial overlap 16.5%, some overlap 39.7%, little overlap 39.0% | 105 | 491 | 16.9% | 31.4 | —† |
| Otero | About typical Partially imputed | 21.2% | high overlap 4.9%, substantial overlap 16.3%, some overlap 31.8%, little overlap 47.0% | 1,277 | 6,032 | 17.7% | 29.3 | —† |
| Weld | About typical | 21.1% | high overlap 4.6%, substantial overlap 16.5%, some overlap 24.5%, little overlap 54.4% | 26,027 | 123,439 | 17.7% | 27.0 | 60 |
| Gunnison | About typical | 21.0% | high overlap 4.4%, substantial overlap 16.5%, some overlap 29.2%, little overlap 49.9% | 1,978 | 9,438 | 17.4% | 28.7 | 36 |
| San Juan | About typical Heavily imputed | 21.0% | high overlap 4.5%, substantial overlap 16.5%, some overlap 31.0%, little overlap 48.0% | 94 | 448 | 17.9% | 29.5 | —† |
| Garfield | About typical | 20.9% | high overlap 4.4%, substantial overlap 16.5%, some overlap 28.6%, little overlap 50.5% | 5,818 | 27,868 | 17.2% | 28.1 | 49 |
| Routt | About typical | 20.9% | high overlap 4.7%, substantial overlap 16.2%, some overlap 29.4%, little overlap 49.7% | 3,411 | 16,323 | 17.7% | 28.7 | 35 |
| Mesa | About typical | 20.8% | high overlap 5.2%, substantial overlap 15.6%, some overlap 29.0%, little overlap 50.2% | 13,916 | 66,883 | 17.6% | 28.6 | 38 |
| Kit Carson | Below typical Partially imputed | 20.7% | high overlap 5.5%, substantial overlap 15.2%, some overlap 28.3%, little overlap 51.0% | 631 | 3,047 | 17.4% | 28.1 | —† |
| Huerfano | Below typical Heavily imputed | 20.6% | high overlap 4.7%, substantial overlap 15.9%, some overlap 30.6%, little overlap 48.8% | 381 | 1,851 | 17.0% | 28.9 | —† |
| Pueblo | Below typical | 20.6% | high overlap 4.8%, substantial overlap 15.8%, some overlap 29.5%, little overlap 49.9% | 12,694 | 61,514 | 17.3% | 28.7 | 34 |
| Washington | Below typical Partially imputed | 20.6% | high overlap 4.5%, substantial overlap 16.0%, some overlap 31.6%, little overlap 47.9% | 249 | 1,213 | 17.0% | 28.3 | —† |
| Moffat | Below typical Partially imputed | 20.4% | high overlap 4.8%, substantial overlap 15.6%, some overlap 29.4%, little overlap 50.2% | 928 | 4,558 | 17.0% | 28.4 | —† |
| Sedgwick | Below typical Partially imputed | 20.3% | high overlap 4.9%, substantial overlap 15.4%, some overlap 34.0%, little overlap 45.7% | 143 | 705 | 17.0% | 29.1 | —† |
| Chaffee | Below typical | 20.2% | high overlap 4.7%, substantial overlap 15.5%, some overlap 31.4%, little overlap 48.4% | 1,889 | 9,346 | 16.9% | 29.1 | 30 |
| Las Animas | Below typical Partially imputed | 20.2% | high overlap 4.6%, substantial overlap 15.6%, some overlap 31.6%, little overlap 48.2% | 936 | 4,636 | 16.9% | 29.2 | —† |
| Pitkin | Below typical | 20.2% | high overlap 4.4%, substantial overlap 15.7%, some overlap 28.2%, little overlap 51.7% | 3,578 | 17,753 | 17.0% | 28.6 | 39 |
| Yuma | Below typical Partially imputed | 20.2% | high overlap 5.0%, substantial overlap 15.2%, some overlap 27.8%, little overlap 52.0% | 816 | 4,046 | 17.1% | 27.2 | —† |
| Montezuma | Below typical Partially imputed | 20.1% | high overlap 4.6%, substantial overlap 15.5%, some overlap 30.3%, little overlap 49.6% | 1,875 | 9,324 | 16.8% | 28.7 | —† |
| Prowers | Below typical Partially imputed | 19.9% | high overlap 4.4%, substantial overlap 15.5%, some overlap 31.6%, little overlap 48.5% | 934 | 4,695 | 16.5% | 28.2 | —† |
| Saguache | Below typical Partially imputed | 19.8% | high overlap 4.6%, substantial overlap 15.2%, some overlap 28.9%, little overlap 51.3% | 330 | 1,670 | 16.4% | 27.2 | —† |
| Phillips | Well below typical Heavily imputed | 19.6% | high overlap 5.1%, substantial overlap 14.5%, some overlap 27.5%, little overlap 52.9% | 351 | 1,793 | 16.5% | 26.9 | —† |
| Montrose | Well below typical | 19.5% | high overlap 4.9%, substantial overlap 14.6%, some overlap 27.1%, little overlap 53.4% | 3,415 | 17,497 | 16.6% | 27.3 | 54 |
| San Miguel | Well below typical Partially imputed | 19.2% | high overlap 4.2%, substantial overlap 15.0%, some overlap 27.0%, little overlap 53.8% | 1,166 | 6,076 | 16.3% | 27.5 | —† |
| Delta | Well below typical | 19.1% | high overlap 4.3%, substantial overlap 14.8%, some overlap 29.3%, little overlap 51.6% | 1,681 | 8,804 | 15.9% | 27.6 | 51 |
| Rio Grande | Well below typical Partially imputed | 19.0% | high overlap 4.7%, substantial overlap 14.3%, some overlap 24.1%, little overlap 56.9% | 840 | 4,409 | 16.1% | 26.1 | —† |
| Eagle | Well below typical | 18.8% | high overlap 4.4%, substantial overlap 14.4%, some overlap 27.1%, little overlap 54.1% | 6,693 | 35,609 | 16.1% | 27.2 | 59 |
| Conejos | Well below typical Heavily imputed | 18.2% | high overlap 3.6%, substantial overlap 14.6%, some overlap 35.3%, little overlap 46.5% | 300 | 1,649 | 14.9% | 28.2 | —† |
| Archuleta | Well below typical Partially imputed | 18.1% | high overlap 4.1%, substantial overlap 14.0%, some overlap 30.1%, little overlap 51.8% | 887 | 4,898 | 15.4% | 27.6 | —† |
| Grand | Well below typical | 17.7% | high overlap 3.9%, substantial overlap 13.8%, some overlap 28.4%, little overlap 53.9% | 1,448 | 8,193 | 15.1% | 27.3 | 55 |
| Summit | Well below typical | 17.6% | high overlap 4.0%, substantial overlap 13.6%, some overlap 28.1%, little overlap 54.3% | 3,961 | 22,484 | 15.0% | 27.2 | 56 |
| Morgan | Well below typical Partially imputed | 17.1% | high overlap 4.0%, substantial overlap 13.1%, some overlap 23.6%, little overlap 59.3% | 2,259 | 13,239 | 14.3% | 24.7 | —† |
| Gilpin | Well below typical Heavily imputed | 15.9% | high overlap 3.6%, substantial overlap 12.3%, some overlap 25.8%, little overlap 58.3% | 762 | 4,787 | 13.4% | 26.3 | —† |
† Rank withheld: more than 30% of the county's employment sits in suppressed cells estimated by imputation, and ordinal differences at that resolution are not meaningful. The band (shown with its data-quality flag) is the sturdier summary; full ranks remain in the data downloads. Note that the rank orders the 0–100 mean score while the band is cut on the share of jobs, so the two can disagree for a county whose exposed work is unusually concentrated or unusually well paid.
One set of numbers. Two ways to see Colorado.
Size by jobs to see where people work, or use the map to find a place. Color always means the same thing.
Counties sized by jobs
Bigger areas mean more jobs in 2025; darker blue means a larger share in the top two tiers. On phones, bars show the 15 largest job markets instead of rectangles. Every county's figures are in the county table.
| County | UI-covered jobs | High + substantial share | Exposure band | Data quality |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Denver | 560,749 | 33.1% | Well above the typical Colorado county | Full |
| Arapahoe | 340,882 | 31.0% | Well above the typical Colorado county | Full |
| El Paso | 308,056 | 26.4% | Well above the typical Colorado county | Full |
| Adams | 249,651 | 22.4% | Above the typical county | Full |
| Jefferson | 247,212 | 27.1% | Well above the typical Colorado county | Full |
| Boulder | 191,474 | 32.6% | Well above the typical Colorado county | Full |
| Larimer | 171,290 | 24.7% | Well above the typical Colorado county | Full |
| Douglas | 149,574 | 30.8% | Well above the typical Colorado county | Full |
| Weld | 123,439 | 21.1% | About typical | Full |
| Mesa | 66,883 | 20.8% | About typical | Partially imputed |
| Pueblo | 61,514 | 20.6% | Below the typical county | Partially imputed |
| Broomfield | 40,750 | 35.3% | Well above the typical Colorado county | Partially imputed |
| Eagle | 35,609 | 18.8% | Well below the typical county | Partially imputed |
| Garfield | 27,868 | 20.9% | About typical | Partially imputed |
| La Plata | 27,323 | 23.4% | Above the typical county | Partially imputed |
| Summit | 22,484 | 17.6% | Well below the typical county | Partially imputed |
| Pitkin | 17,753 | 20.2% | Below the typical county | Partially imputed |
| Montrose | 17,497 | 19.5% | Well below the typical county | Partially imputed |
| Routt | 16,323 | 20.9% | About typical | Partially imputed |
| Fremont | 14,529 | 22.4% | Above the typical county | Partially imputed |
| Morgan | 13,239 | 17.1% | Well below the typical county | Partially imputed |
| Gunnison | 9,438 | 21.0% | About typical | Partially imputed |
| Chaffee | 9,346 | 20.2% | Below the typical county | Partially imputed |
| Montezuma | 9,324 | 20.1% | Below the typical county | Partially imputed |
| Delta | 8,804 | 19.1% | Well below the typical county | Partially imputed |
| Grand | 8,193 | 17.7% | Well below the typical county | Partially imputed |
| Alamosa | 8,171 | 21.8% | Above the typical county | Partially imputed |
| Teller | 8,108 | 21.7% | Above the typical county | Partially imputed |
| Logan | 7,773 | 21.8% | Above the typical county | Partially imputed |
| San Miguel | 6,076 | 19.2% | Well below the typical county | Partially imputed |
| Otero | 6,032 | 21.2% | About typical | Partially imputed |
| Elbert | 5,141 | 22.4% | Above the typical county | Partially imputed |
| Archuleta | 4,898 | 18.1% | Well below the typical county | Partially imputed |
| Gilpin | 4,787 | 15.9% | Well below the typical county | Heavily imputed — 86.4% of employment estimated |
| Prowers | 4,695 | 19.9% | Below the typical county | Partially imputed |
| Las Animas | 4,636 | 20.2% | Below the typical county | Partially imputed |
| Moffat | 4,558 | 20.4% | Below the typical county | Partially imputed |
| Rio Grande | 4,409 | 19.0% | Well below the typical county | Partially imputed |
| Yuma | 4,046 | 20.2% | Below the typical county | Partially imputed |
| Clear Creek | 3,430 | 21.6% | Above the typical county | Heavily imputed — 58.2% of employment estimated |
| Park | 3,123 | 23.9% | Well above the typical Colorado county | Partially imputed |
| Kit Carson | 3,047 | 20.7% | Below the typical county | Partially imputed |
| Lake | 2,963 | 23.3% | Above the typical county | Heavily imputed — 54.4% of employment estimated |
| Rio Blanco | 2,858 | 21.6% | Above the typical county | Heavily imputed — 50.8% of employment estimated |
| Ouray | 2,192 | 21.5% | About typical | Heavily imputed — 60.1% of employment estimated |
| Lincoln | 2,191 | 23.4% | Above the typical county | Partially imputed |
| Huerfano | 1,851 | 20.6% | Below the typical county | Heavily imputed — 57.9% of employment estimated |
| Phillips | 1,793 | 19.6% | Well below the typical county | Heavily imputed — 56.8% of employment estimated |
| Saguache | 1,670 | 19.8% | Below the typical county | Partially imputed |
| Conejos | 1,649 | 18.2% | Well below the typical county | Heavily imputed — 53.8% of employment estimated |
| Washington | 1,213 | 20.6% | Below the typical county | Partially imputed |
| Bent | 1,172 | 25.3% | Well above the typical Colorado county | Heavily imputed — 55.4% of employment estimated |
| Baca | 1,164 | 21.3% | About typical | Partially imputed |
| Crowley | 1,121 | 28.8% | Well above the typical Colorado county | Heavily imputed — 54.8% of employment estimated |
| Custer | 1,026 | 21.7% | Above the typical county | Heavily imputed — 52.8% of employment estimated |
| Costilla | 925 | 21.4% | About typical | Heavily imputed — 53.6% of employment estimated |
| Cheyenne | 717 | 21.5% | About typical | Heavily imputed — 57.6% of employment estimated |
| Sedgwick | 705 | 20.3% | Below the typical county | Partially imputed |
| Mineral | 607 | 24.0% | Well above the typical Colorado county | Heavily imputed — 63.1% of employment estimated |
| Jackson | 558 | 21.5% | About typical | Heavily imputed — 65.2% of employment estimated |
| Dolores | 526 | 24.5% | Well above the typical Colorado county | Heavily imputed — 54.2% of employment estimated |
| Kiowa | 491 | 21.3% | About typical | Partially imputed |
| San Juan | 448 | 21.0% | About typical | Heavily imputed — 75.4% of employment estimated |
| Hinsdale | 302 | 23.1% | Above the typical county | Partially imputed |
Counties on the map
County size here represents land, not jobs. Select a county for its figures, or use the county table above.
Interactive map loads here. Every county's numbers are in the county table above.