Compare towns
Reading vs St. Johnsbury vs Peacham
Cost, people, housing, commute and schools, side by side, each benchmarked against Vermont.
What stands out worked out from the figures below
Reading has grown the fastest since 2010 (+3.2%).
St. Johnsbury has the most affordable homes ($178k median).
Peacham has the highest household income ($90k).
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 | Reading | St. Johnsbury | Peacham |
|---|---|---|---|
| Your priorities | |||
| People | |||
| Population | 699Lowest |
7,368Highest |
887 |
| Growth since 20102010 → 2020 census | +3.2%Highest VT: +2.8% |
-3.1%Lowest VT: +2.8% |
-2.3% VT: +2.8% |
| Median age | 51.1±7.6Highest 19% above VT |
42.8±3.8Lowest about the VT average |
50.1±5.7 16% above VT |
| Reading and Peacham are within the Census margin of error here, so we can’t say which is really higher. | |||
| Kids under 18 | 18.5%±4.2Lowest VT: 17.9% |
21%±2.9Highest VT: 17.9% |
20.7%±6 VT: 17.9% |
| St. Johnsbury and Peacham are within the Census margin of error here, so we can’t say which is really higher. | |||
| Age 65+ | 28.2%±3.3 VT: 21.4% |
21.1%±3.6Lowest VT: 21.4% |
33.6%±2.6Highest VT: 21.4% |
| Peacham and Reading are within the Census margin of error here, so we can’t say which is really higher. | |||
| Bachelor’s degree+adults 25+ | 46% VT: 43.8% |
30.3%Lowest VT: 43.8% |
48.9%Highest VT: 43.8% |
| Enrolled in collegeshare of residents | 3.1%±2.5Lowest VT: 7% |
5.6%±2.2Highest VT: 7% |
5.4%±4 VT: 7% |
| St. Johnsbury and Peacham are within the Census margin of error here, so we can’t say which is really higher. | |||
| Cost of living | |||
| Household incomemedian | $85,000±$19k 5% above VT |
$57,738±$9kLowest 29% below VT |
$90,000±$28kHighest 11% above VT |
| Peacham and Reading are within the Census margin of error here, so we can’t say which is really higher. | |||
| Home valuemedian, owner-occupied | $377,200±$72kHighest 19% above VT |
$177,700±$17kLowest 44% below VT |
$302,000±$64k 5% below VT |
| Reading and Peacham are within the Census margin of error here, so we can’t say which is really higher. | |||
| Rentmedian gross, monthly | $1,100±$331Highest 11% below VT |
$914±$44Lowest 26% below VT |
$1,028±$248 17% below VT |
| Reading and Peacham are within the Census margin of error here, so we can’t say which is really higher. | |||
| Property taxmedian, yearly | $5,754Highest 14% above VT |
$3,916Lowest 22% below VT |
$5,605 11% above VT |
| Renters paying 30%+of income on rent | 63.3%±31.7 VT: 48.4% |
48%±11Lowest VT: 48.4% |
66.7%±17.7Highest VT: 48.4% |
| Peacham and Reading are within the Census margin of error here, so we can’t say which is really higher. | |||
| Below poverty line | 8.4%Lowest VT: 10.1% |
16.8%Highest VT: 10.1% |
10.6% VT: 10.1% |
| Housing | |||
| Homeownersof occupied homes | 84.9%Highest VT: 73.2% |
59.6%Lowest VT: 73.2% |
76.1% VT: 73.2% |
| Typical home builtmedian year | 1969 7 yrs older than VT |
1944Lowest 32 yrs older than VT |
1976Highest same as VT |
| Getting to work | |||
| Average commuteone way | 33 minHighest 41% above VT |
20 minLowest 17% below VT |
31 min 31% above VT |
| Work from home | 22.9%±10.6 VT: 16.9% |
17.6%±4.8Lowest VT: 16.9% |
24.2%±16.9Highest VT: 16.9% |
| Peacham and Reading 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 | — | #60 of 70 in VT | — |
| School district | Mountain Views Unified Union School District #76 | — | Peacham School District |
| High school in town | None in town | — | None in town |
| On TownTapestry | |||
| Old photos in Our Story | None yet | None yet | None yet |
VT 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.