DesignRush Reveals the 7 Most Challenging U.S. Cities for Solo Businesses in 2025
New York, New York--(Newsfile Corp. - August 15, 2025) - A new report from DesignRush reveals the seven least profitable U.S. cities for solopreneurs in 2025, exposing where independent founders are most likely to operate at a loss despite the rise of solo work.
America's Least Profitable Cities for Solo Businesses Ranked
To view an enhanced version of this graphic, please visit:
https://images.newsfilecorp.com/files/10587/262499_14901628e4d3bad2_001full.jpg
In some regions, solo founders are losing more than $7,000 annually after expenses.
Using U.S. Census Bureau revenue data and Forbes' 2025 Cost of Living Index, the DesignRush Solopreneur Profitability Report analyzed 385 metro areas to pinpoint where solo businesses are struggling to stay financially afloat.
The 7 U.S. Cities With the Highest Expense-to-Revenue Ratios for Solo Businesses in 2025
Seven Least Profitable U.S. Cities for Solo Businesses in 2025
To view an enhanced version of this graphic, please visit:
https://images.newsfilecorp.com/files/10587/262499_14901628e4d3bad2_002full.jpg
1. Elmira, NY
Elmira ranks highest in the report, with an estimated -$7,796 average annual gap between solo business earnings and cost of living. The city has 4,339 nonemployer businesses.
"We often hear that remote work has leveled the playing field for solo businesses. But this data shows why regional context still matters," said Gianluca Ferruggia, General Manager at DesignRush.
2. Hinesville, GA
Solo founders here face an average income shortfall of -$6,594 per year. The city hosts 5,734 solo businesses. Living costs are estimated at 121% of average founder income.
"This invaluable asset will serve as a wellspring of innovation and a cornerstone of growth for our community… It is not merely a building; it is a symbol of the city's commitment to fostering local talent." - Allen Brown, Mayor of Hinesville
3. El Centro, CA
Solo workers in El Centro bring in $46,950/year, which sounds reasonable, until you learn that 113% of it is spent on living costs ($53,171). This means $6,221 in annual losses.
With 10,887 solo founders, this is more than a niche issue. That's $67 million in collective losses every year across El Centro's self-employed workforce.
Local reports say 1 in 3 founders is considering relocation citing high taxes, inflation, and lack of infrastructure.
4. Albany, GA
The average solo business in Albany loses -6,033 per year, spending 118% of their income just to live.
There are 14,323 solo founders in Albany. That's $86.4 million in aggregate solo revenue, but over $86 million in living costs, leaving almost no room for net gain at the city level.
5. Vallejo, CA
Despite sitting near one of the world's most powerful innovation centers, solo founders in Vallejo are losing $5,805 annually. They earn a decent $47,366, but spend $53,171 just to live, or 112% of their income.
"Despite proximity to the tech corridor, Vallejo's solo workforce is facing higher unemployment and declining contract opportunities" - Local Observer Daily
6. Amherst-Northampton, MA
This metro area shows a -$5,020 gap between average solo income and living expenses. It has 14,070 solo-operated businesses.
Many solo workers in the region depend on out-of-market clients to manage local cost pressures, according to local interviews.
7. Watertown-Fort Drum, NY
Watertown ranked the seventh worst U.S. city for solo founders in 2025, as they lose $4,233 every year.
There are just 6,098 solo businesses in the region, and nearly all remain dependent on Fort Drum.
"Approximately 4,600 soldiers and military spouses transition out of Fort Drum each year," according to North Country Public Radio.
Methodology
The report uses U.S. Census Bureau data on nonemployer business revenue and Forbes' 2025 city-specific cost of living index to calculate the ratio of living costs to average solo business income. The analysis includes 385 metro areas across the U.S.
About DesignRush
DesignRush.com is a B2B marketplace that connects businesses with agencies in branding, digital marketing, development, and consulting. Through original reports and strategic rankings, DesignRush helps businesses scale smarter.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CBC
21 minutes ago
- CBC
Can the ZEV mandate survive political pressure and industry objections?
Social Sharing With the federal carbon tax dead and gone, Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre has found a new target among the Liberal government's climate policies — the electric vehicle availability standard, otherwise known as the zero-emission vehicle (ZEV) mandate. "We will legalize, into the future, your right to drive a gas or diesel-powered truck or car by repealing the Liberal EV mandate," Poilievre said last week, while restating his desire to see a number of Liberal policies repealed. In a Conservative fundraising email in June, Poilievre's deputy leader, Melissa Lantsman, put the issue in even more bracing terms, writing that the "radical Liberals" were planning to make gas-powered vehicles "illegal" and "force" people to buy "expensive" EVs. Appealing to supporters in rural areas — where EVs might be less practical at the moment — Lantsman added that "Liberals in Ottawa and in busy downtown cores think they know better than you." On Thursday, Poilievre announced that Conservatives would be launching a " nationwide campaign" to stop the mandate. The Conservative leader is smart enough to know he is pushing against a policy that is already under pressure. But that may set up the ZEV mandate as a test of the ability of Mark Carney's government to defend and meaningfully advance climate policy — a test Justin Trudeau's government arguably failed on the carbon tax. Whether or not the Charter can be read to give Canadians the "right" to own an internal-combustion engine, it's not quite the case that gas-powered vehicles will be made illegal. More specifically, the ZEV mandate establishes a series of escalating light-duty vehicle sales targets for auto manufacturers and importers, starting at 20 per cent in 2026 and reaching 100 per cent in 2035. Companies have some flexibility if they are unable or unwilling to meet the annual target — they can buy credits from other sellers or invest in charging infrastructure. The debate over EV policy Advocates of action to fight climate change have supported mandates as a way to guarantee a predictable supply of EVs and accelerate adoption — British Columbia and Quebec have each had ZEV mandates for several years. But North American automakers have bristled at the prospect of additional regulation and would prefer to stick with less-prescriptive regulations aimed at emissions from passenger vehicles. Though those "tailpipe" standards have typically been harmonized with the United States and the Trump administration is currently intent on repealing its regulations. Automakers have called on Carney's government to change or scrap the mandate. Against the backdrop of a trade war, the government seems willing to hear them out — Industry Minister Mélanie Joly told the Globe and Mail in July that the government was working with industry to "find what would be that right level." WATCH | Automakers want EV mandate removed: Automakers push Ottawa to drop EV mandates 1 month ago In arguing against the mandate, the auto industry also now points to a recent slump in EV sales in Canada. But auto executives themselves have said the recent slump is a " direct response" to changes in the rebates offered by federal and provincial governments. The federal government's EV incentive ended in January, Quebec's incentive was temporarily paused in February and British Columbia halted its rebate program in May. The Carney government has said it's working on a new rebate, but that promise might be pushing prospective buyers to wait. Joanna Kyriazis, director of public affairs at Clean Energy Canada, says the Liberal government should broadly stay the course with its mandate, but there are compromises it could make. The Liberals could, for instance, build in additional flexabilities or adjust some of the near-term targets. It could even adjust the ultimate target of 2035. "If this idea of a 100 per cent sales target is really polarizing and really scary to Canadians, then bring it down to 95 per cent — show that there's room for the niche applications or niche situations where in 10 years EVs still might not work," Kyriazis says, though adding that she thinks the technology will have advanced enough by then that such an allowance won't be necessary. Such changes might have the effect of watering down the initial policy without deviating from the larger goal — significantly increasing the use of non-gas-powered vehicles for the sake of reducing the greenhouse gas emissions that cause climate change. "[The current sales targets are] in line with where the rest of the world is going," Kyriazis argues. "North America is on a little detour right now, but in the rest of the world, EV sales keep on rising." Worldwide, electric vehicles and plug-in hybrids accounted for 22 per cent of all new car sales in 2024, according to data from the International Energy Agency. In Canada, according to the IEA, EVs accounted for 17 per cent of all sales (Statistics Canada says it was 14 per cent). In the U.K. — where a Conservative government introduced a ZEV mandate in 2024, which was then amended by a Labour government — EVs accounted for 28 per cent of all new cars sold last year. In France, they accounted for 24 per cent. "If you look at jurisdictions that have high levels of EV adoption, it's because they have put in place the conditions to create strong consumer demand. So you have incentives … and you have a much more effective charging infrastructure rollout," says Brian Kingston, president of the Canadian Vehicle Manufacturers' Association, which represents Ford, General Motors and Stellantis. Beyond the question of which type of regulations make more sense, that argument might make the case for governments putting even more money toward building charging infrastructure, alongside reintroducing rebates for consumers. The politics of EVs In the meantime, there will be a political fight — and it will apparently be waged in terms of a culture war. In a video posted in June, Poilievre said the mandate was not about reducing emissions, but about "imposing elite ideology on the common people." The last time a federal climate policy came under this much concentrated pressure, the carbon tax suffered from both the surging inflation that followed the pandemic and the falling popularity of the prime minister who introduced it. The Trudeau government then undercut its own policy with a carve-out aimed at voters in one region of the country. Appearing before a Senate committee not long after the Trudeau government made that move, Mark Carney said that "if something is going to be changed, then something at least as good is put in its place. Ideally, if you're going to change something, you put in place something better that still has that credibility and predictability that has the power that drives investment." That stated principle might hang over whatever the Carney government is considering now. Ultimately — for Carney and Poilievre, for Canadians in urban and rural communities — there is the unforgiving math of climate change and greenhouse gas emissions. Canada is currently aiming to reduce its total national emissions by at least 40 per cent below 2005 levels by 2030. The federal government is further aiming to reach net-zero emissions by 2050. The transportation sector accounted for 156.6 megatonnes of emissions in 2023 — 22.6 per cent of Canada's total emissions. Specifically, passenger cars and light trucks for 91.5 megatonnes — 13.2 per cent of the national total.
Globe and Mail
4 hours ago
- Globe and Mail
Manning & Napier Advisors LLC Boosts Nvidia Holdings
Elevate Your Investing Strategy: Take advantage of TipRanks Premium at 50% off! Unlock powerful investing tools, advanced data, and expert analyst insights to help you invest with confidence. Manning & Napier Advisors LLC, managed by Bill Manning, recently executed a significant transaction involving Nvidia Corporation ((NVDA)). The hedge fund increased its position by 130,513 shares. Spark's Take on NVDA Stock According to Spark, TipRanks' AI Analyst, NVDA is a Outperform. Nvidia's strong financial performance and positive earnings call highlight its leadership in the semiconductor industry, driven by robust growth in AI and data center segments. Technical indicators suggest a strong bullish trend, although valuation concerns due to a high P/E ratio and overbought signals may pose risks. The strategic focus on AI offsets geopolitical challenges, supporting a positive outlook. To see Spark's full report on NVDA stock, click here. More about Nvidia Corporation YTD Price Performance: 35.24% Average Trading Volume: 184,906,931 Current Market Cap: $4469.1B Disclaimer & Disclosure Report an Issue
Globe and Mail
5 hours ago
- Globe and Mail
Manning & Napier Advisors LLC Reduces Stake in Meta
Elevate Your Investing Strategy: Take advantage of TipRanks Premium at 50% off! Unlock powerful investing tools, advanced data, and expert analyst insights to help you invest with confidence. Manning & Napier Advisors LLC, managed by Bill Manning, recently executed a significant transaction involving Meta Platforms, Inc. ((META)). The hedge fund reduced its position by 255,982 shares. Spark's Take on META Stock According to Spark, TipRanks' AI Analyst, META is a Outperform. Meta Platforms excels in financial performance with strong growth and profitability metrics, which is the most significant factor driving the stock score. The positive momentum in technical analysis and favorable earnings call sentiment further bolster the score. However, valuation concerns and regulatory challenges pose moderate risks. To see Spark's full report on META stock, click here. More about Meta Platforms, Inc. YTD Price Performance: 33.45% Average Trading Volume: 12,133,089 Current Market Cap: $1984.5B Disclaimer & Disclosure Report an Issue
