Compare towns
Prospect vs Naugatuck vs Bethany
Cost, people, housing, commute and schools, side by side, each benchmarked against Connecticut.
What stands out worked out from the figures below
Prospect has the shortest commute (28 min average).
Naugatuck has the most renters (32.2% rent).
Bethany has the highest household income ($166k).
What matters to you?
Pick a few. We’ll pull those rows to the top and mark which town comes out ahead on each. There’s no overall score: what matters is up to you.
| Measure | Prospect | Naugatuck | Bethany |
|---|---|---|---|
| Your priorities | |||
| People | |||
| Population | 9,458 |
31,800Highest |
5,288Lowest |
| Growth since 20102010 → 2020 census | — | -1.1% CT: +0.9% |
— |
| Median age | 46.8±3.9Highest 14% above CT |
39.8±2.4Lowest 3% below CT |
42.5±2.9 3% above CT |
| Prospect and Bethany are within the Census margin of error here, so we can’t say which is really higher. | |||
| Kids under 18 | 21.4%±4.1Highest CT: 20.2% |
19.9%±2.3Lowest CT: 20.2% |
20.3%±5.9 CT: 20.2% |
| Prospect and Bethany are within the Census margin of error here, so we can’t say which is really higher. | |||
| Age 65+ | 24.5%±4.3Highest CT: 18.5% |
15.6%±2Lowest CT: 18.5% |
17.2%±4.2 CT: 18.5% |
| Prospect and Bethany are within the Census margin of error here, so we can’t say which is really higher. | |||
| Bachelor’s degree+adults 25+ | 40.3% CT: 42.5% |
32.2%Lowest CT: 42.5% |
58%Highest CT: 42.5% |
| Enrolled in collegeshare of residents | 3.5%±1.8Lowest CT: 7.1% |
7.8%±1.7Highest CT: 7.1% |
6.8%±3.7 CT: 7.1% |
| Naugatuck and Bethany are within the Census margin of error here, so we can’t say which is really higher. | |||
| Cost of living | |||
| Household incomemedian | $126,394±$18k 32% above CT |
$96,324±$9kLowest about the CT average |
$166,236±$20kHighest 74% above CT |
| Home valuemedian, owner-occupied | $355,400±$21k 3% below CT |
$259,100±$13kLowest 29% below CT |
$418,000±$42kHighest 14% above CT |
| Bethany and Prospect are within the Census margin of error here, so we can’t say which is really higher. | |||
| Rentmedian gross, monthly | $1,800±$433Highest 21% above CT |
$1,369±$58Lowest 8% below CT |
— |
| Prospect and Naugatuck are within the Census margin of error here, so we can’t say which is really higher. | |||
| Property taxmedian, yearly | $6,504 about the CT average |
$6,362Lowest 4% below CT |
$8,313Highest 25% above CT |
| Renters paying 30%+of income on rent | 45.3%±31.8Highest CT: 52.6% |
42.2%±9.4 CT: 52.6% |
0%±100Lowest CT: 52.6% |
| Prospect and Naugatuck are within the Census margin of error here, so we can’t say which is really higher. | |||
| Below poverty line | 3.2% CT: 10% |
6.3%Highest CT: 10% |
2.3%Lowest CT: 10% |
| Housing | |||
| Homeownersof occupied homes | 93.5% CT: 66.5% |
67.8%Lowest CT: 66.5% |
97.2%Highest CT: 66.5% |
| Typical home builtmedian year | 1974Highest 7 yrs newer than CT |
1971 4 yrs newer than CT |
1970Lowest 3 yrs newer than CT |
| Getting to work | |||
| Average commuteone way | 28 minLowest 4% above CT |
33 minHighest 26% above CT |
32 min 21% above CT |
| Work from home | 10.1%±3.2Lowest CT: 16% |
15%±2.8Highest CT: 16% |
12%±5.2 CT: 16% |
| Naugatuck and Bethany are within the Census margin of error here, so we can’t say which is really higher. | |||
| Schools | |||
| Public school scoresrank in state, math + reading | #50 of 149 in CT | #116 of 149 in CT | #30 of 149 in CT |
| School district | Regional School District 16 | Naugatuck School District | Bethany School District · Regional School District 05 |
| High school in town | None in town | Naugatuck High School | None in town |
| Students per teacherat that high school | — | 15.2 |
— |
| On TownTapestry | |||
| Old photos in History | None yet | None yet | None yet |
CT average · Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-year estimates 2020–2024; 2010 & 2020 decennial census; NCES Common Core of Data. “±” is the Census margin of error. Property tax is top-coded by the Census at $10,000+. School rank compares math and reading proficiency against the state average.

