Where Most People Work From Home – 2026 Study

Remote work can open up a lot of opportunities for employees, families, and employers alike. However, shifts into remote work may also cause short-term challenges to some communities – such as loss or redistribution of businesses and services used by commuters. Between 2023 and 2024, remote work actually declined in large U.S. cities, going from 15.7% of workers to 13.45%. Tradeoffs abound, tracking the evolution of work culture and where the spoils of productivity end up can provide guidance to businesses, politicians, job-seekers, and employers alike.

With this in mind, SmartAsset ranked 357 of the largest U.S. cities based on the percentage of people working from home. Mean commute time saved and other metrics are also evaluated.

Key Findings

One third of workers are remote in Frisco, TX. Frisco remains the top city for remote work with 33.7% of workers aged 16 and up working from home, despite a slight decline from 34.2% a year earlier. The rest of the top five saw slight to moderate increases in remote work year over year, including Berkeley, CA (31.5%); Cary, NC (30.6%); Boulder, CO (29.8%); and Scottsdale, AZ (28.0%).
Remote work grew most in these cities. St. George, UT saw the highest growth in remote work year over year, going from 10.3% of workers to 17.0% between 2023 and 2024. The workforce in Conroe, TX saw a similar trend, with remote work prevalence increasing from 9.3% to 15.5%. In San Tan Valley, AZ, remote work grew from 9.7% of workers to 15.3%.
In 12 cities, more than 10% of people walk to work. Walking to work is most prevalent in the New England cities of Cambridge, MA (21.5%); New Haven, CT (16.3%) and Boston, MA (14.6%). Other heavily walkable cities for commuters include Boulder, CO (12.2%); Provo, UT (12.0%); Ann Arbor, MI (12.0%); Columbia, SC (11.4%); Seattle, WA (10.7%); Wichita Falls, TX (10.7%); Washington, DC (10.7%); and San Francisco, CA (10.0%).
Remote workers are spared the longest commute times in these cities. The average commute time for non-remote workers is highest in Hesperia, CA at 50 minutes. Tracy (43.8 minutes); Antioch (41.5 minutes); Menifee (41.4 minutes); Moreno Valley (41.2 minutes); and Palmdale (41.1 minutes) are also at the top of the list. On the other side of the country, New York City and neighboring Jersey City also have among the highest commute times at 40.6 and 39.0 minutes, respectively.

Top 25 Cities for Remote Work

Cities are ranked based on the percentage of people working remotely.

Frisco, Texas

Remote work prevalence, 2024: 33.69%
Number of remote workers: 42133
All workers aged 16+: 125051
Remote work prevalence, 2023: 34.16%
Mean commute time for in-person work: 27.3
Workers who drive to work: 63.38%
Workers who walk to work: 0.92%

Berkeley, California

Remote work prevalence, 2024: 31.49%
Number of remote workers: 17595
All workers aged 16+: 55882
Remote work prevalence, 2023: 31.29%
Mean commute time for in-person work: 27.2
Workers who drive to work: 35.92%
Workers who walk to work: 12.88%

Cary, North Carolina

Remote work prevalence, 2024: 30.58%
Number of remote workers: 29140
All workers aged 16+: 95290
Remote work prevalence, 2023: 29.40%
Mean commute time for in-person work: 23.2
Workers who drive to work: 66.55%
Workers who walk to work: 0.79%

Boulder, Colorado

Remote work prevalence, 2024: 29.75%
Number of remote workers: 16800
All workers aged 16+: 56473
Remote work prevalence, 2023: 28.28%
Mean commute time for in-person work: 18.2
Workers who drive to work: 42.00%
Workers who walk to work: 12.19%

Scottsdale, Arizona

Remote work prevalence, 2024: 27.97%
Number of remote workers: 35739
All workers aged 16+: 127769
Remote work prevalence, 2023: 27.71%
Mean commute time for in-person work: 21.2
Workers who drive to work: 68.18%
Workers who walk to work: 1.18%

Arlington, Virginia

Remote work prevalence, 2024: 26.77%
Number of remote workers: 39191
All workers aged 16+: 146397
Remote work prevalence, 2023: 28.60%
Mean commute time for in-person work: 27.5
Workers who drive to work: 45.99%
Workers who walk to work: 4.21%

McKinney, Texas

Remote work prevalence, 2024: 26.74%
Number of remote workers: 32798
All workers aged 16+: 122639
Remote work prevalence, 2023: 24.23%
Mean commute time for in-person work: 31.8
Workers who drive to work: 69.79%
Workers who walk to work: 0.69%

Fishers, Indiana

Remote work prevalence, 2024: 26.66%
Number of remote workers: 14784
All workers aged 16+: 55453
Remote work prevalence, 2023: 25.15%
Mean commute time for in-person work: 27.6
Workers who drive to work: 70.70%
Workers who walk to work: 1.43%

Boca Raton, Florida

Remote work prevalence, 2024: 25.87%
Number of remote workers: 13607
All workers aged 16+: 52589
Remote work prevalence, 2023: NA
Mean commute time for in-person work: 20.9
Workers who drive to work: 66.41%
Workers who walk to work: 3.25%

Carlsbad, California

Remote work prevalence, 2024: 25.74%
Number of remote workers: 14043
All workers aged 16+: 54554
Remote work prevalence, 2023: 29.06%
Mean commute time for in-person work: 26.5
Workers who drive to work: 70.19%
Workers who walk to work: 1.56%

Atlanta, Georgia

Remote work prevalence, 2024: 25.62%
Number of remote workers: 74207
All workers aged 16+: 289601
Remote work prevalence, 2023: 25.48%
Mean commute time for in-person work: 26.5
Workers who drive to work: 60.80%
Workers who walk to work: 4.79%

Naperville, Illinois

Remote work prevalence, 2024: 25.59%
Number of remote workers: 20251
All workers aged 16+: 79121
Remote work prevalence, 2023: 27.88%
Mean commute time for in-person work: 31.9
Workers who drive to work: 65.83%
Workers who walk to work: 1.12%

Allen, Texas

Remote work prevalence, 2024: 25.51%
Number of remote workers: 15760
All workers aged 16+: 61775
Remote work prevalence, 2023: 21.22%
Mean commute time for in-person work: 28.8
Workers who drive to work: 72.75%
Workers who walk to work: 0.65%

Sandy Springs, Georgia

Remote work prevalence, 2024: 25.34%
Number of remote workers: 15870
All workers aged 16+: 62639
Remote work prevalence, 2023: 28.04%
Mean commute time for in-person work: 24
Workers who drive to work: 67.85%
Workers who walk to work: 1.17%

Pasadena, California

Remote work prevalence, 2024: 25.05%
Number of remote workers: 18257
All workers aged 16+: 72880
Remote work prevalence, 2023: 24.03%
Mean commute time for in-person work: 29
Workers who drive to work: 61.22%
Workers who walk to work: 3.87%

Charlotte, North Carolina

Remote work prevalence, 2024: 24.99%
Number of remote workers: 130426
All workers aged 16+: 521849
Remote work prevalence, 2023: 29.71%
Mean commute time for in-person work: 25.3
Workers who drive to work: 68.62%
Workers who walk to work: 2.03%

Austin, Texas

Remote work prevalence, 2024: 24.76%
Number of remote workers: 148176
All workers aged 16+: 598399
Remote work prevalence, 2023: 28.13%
Mean commute time for in-person work: 24.2
Workers who drive to work: 66.14%
Workers who walk to work: 3.23%

Denver, Colorado

Remote work prevalence, 2024: 24.75%
Number of remote workers: 105633
All workers aged 16+: 426844
Remote work prevalence, 2023: 26.05%
Mean commute time for in-person work: 24.9
Workers who drive to work: 64.63%
Workers who walk to work: 4.13%

Alexandria, Virginia

Remote work prevalence, 2024: 24.70%
Number of remote workers: 25297
All workers aged 16+: 102412
Remote work prevalence, 2023: 22.90%
Mean commute time for in-person work: 30.9
Workers who drive to work: 53.89%
Workers who walk to work: 3.57%

Portland, Oregon

Remote work prevalence, 2024: 24.58%
Number of remote workers: 89364
All workers aged 16+: 363501
Remote work prevalence, 2023: 25.65%
Mean commute time for in-person work: 24.4
Workers who drive to work: 59.47%
Workers who walk to work: 4.25%

Seattle, Washington

Remote work prevalence, 2024: 24.37%
Number of remote workers: 116087
All workers aged 16+: 476426
Remote work prevalence, 2023: 28.46%
Mean commute time for in-person work: 25.9
Workers who drive to work: 45.21%
Workers who walk to work: 10.70%

Carmel, Indiana

Remote work prevalence, 2024: 24.15%
Number of remote workers: 13782
All workers aged 16+: 57072
Remote work prevalence, 2023: 28.29%
Mean commute time for in-person work: 24.4
Workers who drive to work: 74.61%
Workers who walk to work: 0.60%

Sugar Land, Texas

Remote work prevalence, 2024: 23.87%
Number of remote workers: 12598
All workers aged 16+: 52768
Remote work prevalence, 2023: 22.39%
Mean commute time for in-person work: 32.1
Workers who drive to work: 73.34%
Workers who walk to work: 0.57%

San Tan Valley, Arizona

Remote work prevalence, 2024: 23.61%
Number of remote workers: 13487
All workers aged 16+: 57115
Remote work prevalence, 2023: 17.57%
Mean commute time for in-person work: 37.8
Workers who drive to work: 71.38%
Workers who walk to work: 2.16%

Irvine, California

Remote work prevalence, 2024: 23.56%
Number of remote workers: 37611
All workers aged 16+: 159647
Remote work prevalence, 2023: 24.36%
Mean commute time for in-person work: 25.7
Workers who drive to work: 68.13%
Workers who walk to work: 4.04%

Top 25 Cities for In-Person Work

Cities are ranked based on the lowest percentage of people working remotely.

Salinas, California

Remote work prevalence, 2024: 2.50%
Number of remote workers: 1726
All workers aged 16+: 68947
Remote work prevalence, 2023: 5.73%
Mean commute time for in-person work: 27.1
Workers who drive to work: 91.95%
Workers who walk to work: 0.49%

Santa Maria, California

Remote work prevalence, 2024: 3.58%
Number of remote workers: 1670
All workers aged 16+: 46608
Remote work prevalence, 2023: 5.12%
Mean commute time for in-person work: 23
Workers who drive to work: 87.73%
Workers who walk to work: 2.01%

Brockton, Massachusetts

Remote work prevalence, 2024: 4.26%
Number of remote workers: 2114
All workers aged 16+: 49620
Remote work prevalence, 2023: 4.47%
Mean commute time for in-person work: 33.8
Workers who drive to work: 79.93%
Workers who walk to work: 1.34%

Paterson, New Jersey

Remote work prevalence, 2024: 4.64%
Number of remote workers: 3365
All workers aged 16+: 72473
Remote work prevalence, 2023: 6.69%
Mean commute time for in-person work: 23.2
Workers who drive to work: 79.06%
Workers who walk to work: 6.92%

Odessa, Texas

Remote work prevalence, 2024: 4.83%
Number of remote workers: 3039
All workers aged 16+: 62904
Remote work prevalence, 2023: 1.58%
Mean commute time for in-person work: 22.7
Workers who drive to work: 93.12%
Workers who walk to work: 0.89%

Wichita Falls, Texas

Remote work prevalence, 2024: 4.90%
Number of remote workers: 2485
All workers aged 16+: 50764
Remote work prevalence, 2023: 7.40%
Mean commute time for in-person work: 13.3
Workers who drive to work: 82.83%
Workers who walk to work: 10.68%

Pasadena, Texas

Remote work prevalence, 2024: 4.94%
Number of remote workers: 3375
All workers aged 16+: 68315
Remote work prevalence, 2023: 6.06%
Mean commute time for in-person work: 28.4
Workers who drive to work: 90.09%
Workers who walk to work: 2.37%

Lynn, Massachusetts

Remote work prevalence, 2024: 5.07%
Number of remote workers: 2738
All workers aged 16+: 54001
Remote work prevalence, 2023: 7.57%
Mean commute time for in-person work: 32.6
Workers who drive to work: 73.25%
Workers who walk to work: 2.89%

Sunrise Manor, Nevada

Remote work prevalence, 2024: 5.11%
Number of remote workers: 4562
All workers aged 16+: 89200
Remote work prevalence, 2023: 5.94%
Mean commute time for in-person work: 29.4
Workers who drive to work: 89.05%
Workers who walk to work: 0.80%

Midland, Texas

Remote work prevalence, 2024: 5.36%
Number of remote workers: 3669
All workers aged 16+: 68490
Remote work prevalence, 2023: 4.59%
Mean commute time for in-person work: 21.6
Workers who drive to work: 92.49%
Workers who walk to work: 0.61%

Laredo, Texas

Remote work prevalence, 2024: 5.43%
Number of remote workers: 6582
All workers aged 16+: 121293
Remote work prevalence, 2023: 6.08%
Mean commute time for in-person work: 21.8
Workers who drive to work: 91.75%
Workers who walk to work: 0.81%

New Bedford, Massachusetts

Remote work prevalence, 2024: 5.53%
Number of remote workers: 2557
All workers aged 16+: 46219
Remote work prevalence, 2023: 3.83%
Mean commute time for in-person work: 26.1
Workers who drive to work: 86.90%
Workers who walk to work: 1.88%

Kansas City, Kansas

Remote work prevalence, 2024: 5.60%
Number of remote workers: 4278
All workers aged 16+: 76354
Remote work prevalence, 2023: 6.78%
Mean commute time for in-person work: 23.5
Workers who drive to work: 88.91%
Workers who walk to work: 1.37%

Evansville, Indiana

Remote work prevalence, 2024: 5.67%
Number of remote workers: 3081
All workers aged 16+: 54293
Remote work prevalence, 2023: 6.52%
Mean commute time for in-person work: 17.5
Workers who drive to work: 88.11%
Workers who walk to work: 1.97%

Waterbury, Connecticut

Remote work prevalence, 2024: 5.90%
Number of remote workers: 3048
All workers aged 16+: 51626
Remote work prevalence, 2023: 7.58%
Mean commute time for in-person work: 26
Workers who drive to work: 85.38%
Workers who walk to work: 1.27%

Tyler, Texas

Remote work prevalence, 2024: 5.95%
Number of remote workers: 3125
All workers aged 16+: 52483
Remote work prevalence, 2023: 12.43%
Mean commute time for in-person work: 19.6
Workers who drive to work: 90.05%
Workers who walk to work: 2.29%

Killeen, Texas

Remote work prevalence, 2024: 6.01%
Number of remote workers: 4379
All workers aged 16+: 72862
Remote work prevalence, 2023: 7.53%
Mean commute time for in-person work: 25.6
Workers who drive to work: 88.75%
Workers who walk to work: 1.41%

Corpus Christi, Texas

Remote work prevalence, 2024: 6.01%
Number of remote workers: 8839
All workers aged 16+: 146972
Remote work prevalence, 2023: 4.91%
Mean commute time for in-person work: 21.2
Workers who drive to work: 90.14%
Workers who walk to work: 1.26%

Elizabeth, New Jersey

Remote work prevalence, 2024: 6.03%
Number of remote workers: 3989
All workers aged 16+: 66122
Remote work prevalence, 2023: 5.59%
Mean commute time for in-person work: 26.3
Workers who drive to work: 75.04%
Workers who walk to work: 5.00%

Newark, New Jersey

Remote work prevalence, 2024: 6.13%
Number of remote workers: 8342
All workers aged 16+: 136140
Remote work prevalence, 2023: 7.48%
Mean commute time for in-person work: 32.7
Workers who drive to work: 57.10%
Workers who walk to work: 5.98%

Yuma, Arizona

Remote work prevalence, 2024: 6.43%
Number of remote workers: 2835
All workers aged 16+: 44104
Remote work prevalence, 2023: 7.23%
Mean commute time for in-person work: 19.1
Workers who drive to work: 90.42%
Workers who walk to work: 1.24%

Oxnard, California

Remote work prevalence, 2024: 6.45%
Number of remote workers: 6317
All workers aged 16+: 97949
Remote work prevalence, 2023: 7.46%
Mean commute time for in-person work: 26.7
Workers who drive to work: 88.85%
Workers who walk to work: 1.14%

Pueblo, Colorado

Remote work prevalence, 2024: 6.57%
Number of remote workers: 3160
All workers aged 16+: 48072
Remote work prevalence, 2023: 7.00%
Mean commute time for in-person work: 20.1
Workers who drive to work: 89.20%
Workers who walk to work: 2.44%

Wichita, Kansas

Remote work prevalence, 2024: 6.66%
Number of remote workers: 13237
All workers aged 16+: 198842
Remote work prevalence, 2023: 6.85%
Mean commute time for in-person work: 17.3
Workers who drive to work: 89.36%
Workers who walk to work: 1.15%

Miami Gardens, Florida

Remote work prevalence, 2024: 6.69%
Number of remote workers: 3438
All workers aged 16+: 51402
Remote work prevalence, 2023: 6.74%
Mean commute time for in-person work: 36
Workers who drive to work: 86.15%
Workers who walk to work: 0.80%

Data and Methodology

This study considered 357 of the largest U.S. cities with populations of 100,000 or more. Data comes from the U.S. Census Bureau’s 1-Year American Community Survey for 2024. Cities were ranked by the percentage of those who worked from home out of all workers aged 16 and over.