Compare towns
Reading vs Underhill 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 the most homeowners (84.9%).
Underhill has the most kids (27.8% under 18).
Peacham has the most affordable homes ($302k median).
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 | Underhill | Peacham |
|---|---|---|---|
| Your priorities | |||
| People | |||
| Population | 699Lowest |
3,141Highest |
887 |
| Growth since 20102010 → 2020 census | +3.2% VT: +2.8% |
+3.7%Highest VT: +2.8% |
-2.3%Lowest VT: +2.8% |
| Median age | 51.1±7.6Highest 19% above VT |
38.1±11.4Lowest 12% below VT |
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% |
27.8%±10.9Highest VT: 17.9% |
20.7%±6 VT: 17.9% |
| Underhill 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% |
17.6%±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%Lowest VT: 43.8% |
50.1%Highest VT: 43.8% |
48.9% VT: 43.8% |
| Enrolled in collegeshare of residents | 3.1%±2.5Lowest VT: 7% |
3.5%±2 VT: 7% |
5.4%±4Highest VT: 7% |
| Peacham and Underhill are within the Census margin of error here, so we can’t say which is really higher. | |||
| Cost of living | |||
| Household incomemedian | $85,000±$19kLowest 5% above VT |
$92,267±$54kHighest 14% above VT |
$90,000±$28k 11% above VT |
| Underhill and Peacham are within the Census margin of error here, so we can’t say which is really higher. | |||
| Home valuemedian, owner-occupied | $377,200±$72k 19% above VT |
$446,000±$24kHighest 41% above VT |
$302,000±$64kLowest 5% below VT |
| Underhill and Reading 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 |
— | $1,028±$248Lowest 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 | $5,754 14% above VT |
$6,697Highest 33% above VT |
$5,605Lowest 11% above VT |
| Renters paying 30%+of income on rent | 63.3%±31.7 VT: 48.4% |
0%±18.2Lowest 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% VT: 10.1% |
6.4%Lowest VT: 10.1% |
10.6%Highest VT: 10.1% |
| Housing | |||
| Homeownersof occupied homes | 84.9%Highest VT: 73.2% |
79.8% VT: 73.2% |
76.1%Lowest VT: 73.2% |
| Typical home builtmedian year | 1969Lowest 7 yrs older than VT |
1979Highest 3 yrs newer than VT |
1976 same as VT |
| Getting to work | |||
| Average commuteone way | 33 minHighest 41% above VT |
33 min 39% above VT |
31 minLowest 31% above VT |
| Work from home | 22.9%±10.6 VT: 16.9% |
19.4%±11.3Lowest 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 | — | #2 of 70 in VT | — |
| School district | Mountain Views Unified Union School District #76 | Mount Mansfield Unified Union School District #401 | Peacham School District |
| High school in town | None in town | None in town | None in town |
| On TownTapestry | |||
| Old photos in History | 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.