All 2,645 cities by PM2.5, last 24 hours

Every city with enough measurements in this window, worst first.

CPCB in India: no readings since 12 Oct (488 monitors). EEA and Catalonia Medi Ambient I Sostenibilitat in Spain: no readings since 13 Oct (336 monitors). Their cities are missing from this board, not clean.

Hide the 1,153 cities with only 1–2 sensors

These cities have only one or two low-cost sensors, and one cheap unit can read well off, so they take no rank. They sit at their place by value, marked –, and every ranked city keeps its number.

not rankedBowling GreenKentucky, United States 55 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline
not rankedFrederickMaryland, United States 55 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline
=621Konstancin-JeziornaMazovia, Poland 55 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline▲540
=621UedaNagano, Japan 55 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline▼174
=621NobeokaMiyazaki, Japan 55 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline▼236
=621KimitsuChiba, Japan 55 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline▲160
=621IshiokaIbaraki, Japan 55 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline▲642
=621SwarzędzGreater Poland, Poland 55 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline
=621KamagayaChiba, Japan 55 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline▲251
not rankedMarrakeshMarrakesh-Safi, Morocco 55 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline
not rankedTorhoutFlanders, Belgium 55 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline
not rankedBellevueWisconsin, United States 55 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline
not rankedSekongXékong, Laos 55 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline
=628DębicaSubcarpathia, Poland 54 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline▲605
=628YokotaTokyo, Japan 54 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline▼76
=628TokyoTokyo, Japan 54 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline▲127
=628TokonameAichi, Japan 54 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline▼322
=628KanbaraShizuoka, Japan 54 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline
=628HiroshimaHiroshima, Japan 54 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline▼39
=628HijiOita, Japan 54 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline▼160
=628GamagōriAichi, Japan 54 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline▼341
=628BrzegOpole Voivodeship, Poland 54 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline▲130
=628IndianapolisIndiana, United States 54 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline▼51
=628SchrieverLouisiana, United States 54 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline▲281
=628SpringfieldOhio, United States 54 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline▲240
=628YorkPennsylvania, United States 54 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline▲1169
=628DavenportIowa, United States 54 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline▲405
=628ClevelandOhio, United States 54 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline▲716
=628HanfordCalifornia, United States 54 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline▼42
=628NisshinAichi, Japan 54 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline▼143
=628TōkaiAichi, Japan 54 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline▼276
not rankedImperatrizMaranhão, Brazil 54 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline
not rankedSterling HeightsMichigan, United States 54 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline
not rankedManitowocWisconsin, United States 54 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline
=646KazincbarcikaBorsod-Abaúj-Zemplén, Hungary 54 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline▲227
=646YonagoTottori, Japan 54 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline▲149
=646SakadoSaitama, Japan 54 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline▼42
=646HandaAichi, Japan 54 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline▼337
=646FujiedaShizuoka, Japan 54 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline▼149
=646AbidjanAbidjan Autonomous District, Ivory Coast 54 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline▼174
=646LitvínovÚstí nad Labem Region, Czechia 54 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline▲898
=646MarionArkansas, United States 54 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline▲54
=646JeffersonvilleIndiana, United States 54 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline▲137
=646SomersetKentucky, United States 54 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline▲129
=646AthensTennessee, United States 54 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline▲674
=646MaryvilleTennessee, United States 54 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline▲675
=646PortageIndiana, United States 54 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline▲415
=646Hitachi-NakaIbaraki, Japan 54 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline▲266
=646EbinaKanagawa, Japan 54 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline▲337
=646JōsōIbaraki, Japan 54 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline▲10
not rankedBad KissingenBavaria, Germany 54 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline
not rankedDraguignanProvence-Alpes-Côte d'Azur, France 54 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline
not rankedNiagara FallsOntario, Canada 54 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline
=662ShakaskraalKwaZulu-Natal, South Africa 54 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline▼533
=662FerganaFergana, Uzbekistan 54 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline▲670
=662TogitsuNagasaki, Japan 54 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline▼228
=662TakeharaHiroshima, Japan 54 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline▼75
=662ShimadaShizuoka, Japan 54 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline▼195
=662SabaeFukui, Japan 54 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline▲501
=662KumamotoKumamoto, Japan 54 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline
=662KakegawaShizuoka, Japan 54 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline▼117
=662HachiōjiTokyo, Japan 54 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline▼26
=662PúchovTrenčín Region, Slovakia 54 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline▲430
=662Lake CityFlorida, United States 54 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline
=662Wake ForestNorth Carolina, United States 54 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline▲1847
=662Des PlainesIllinois, United States 54 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline▲316
=662ElginIllinois, United States 54 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline▲186
=662MoranbahQueensland, Australia 54 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline▲340
=662ParramattaNew South Wales, Australia 54 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline
not rankedPrivolzhskIvanovo Oblast, Russia 54 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline
not rankedSanokSubcarpathia, Poland 54 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline
=678ČaňaKošice Region, Slovakia 54 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline▲875
=678Si Sa KetSi Sa Ket, Thailand 54 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline▼394
=678YoriiSaitama, Japan 54 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline▼236
=678TamanaKumamoto, Japan 54 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline▼306
=678SanoTochigi, Japan 54 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline▼136
=678NodaChiba, Japan 54 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline▼135
=678KariyaAichi, Japan 54 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline▼393
=678MaryboroughQueensland, Australia 54 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline▼103
=678SchorndorfBaden-Wurttemberg, Germany 54 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline
=678MartinŽilina Region, Slovakia 54 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline▼27
=678MostÚstí nad Labem Region, Czechia 54 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline▲886
=678McDonoughGeorgia, United States 54 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline▲818
=678BeecherMichigan, United States 54 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline▲155
=678KōkaShiga, Japan 54 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline▲848
=678IrumaSaitama, Japan 54 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline▲10
not rankedWołominMazovia, Poland 54 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline
not rankedChachoengsaoChachoengsao, Thailand 54 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline
not rankedApexNorth Carolina, United States 54 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline
not rankedOak ParkIllinois, United States 54 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline
=693PołaniecŚwiętokrzyskie, Poland 54 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline▲294
=693YokohamaKanagawa, Japan 54 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline▲182
=693HonmachiKumamoto, Japan 54 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline▼348
=693TonoshōKagawa, Japan 54 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline
=693GionHiroshima, Japan 54 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline▲166
=693MalackyBratislava Region, Slovakia 54 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline▲979
=693PoznańGreater Poland, Poland 54 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline▲981
=693Kędzierzyn-KoźleOpole Voivodeship, Poland 54 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline▲297
=693ZapopanJalisco, Mexico 54 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline▲281
=693SpartanburgSouth Carolina, United States 54 US AQI0.7 times the WHO guideline▲1357

What stands behind each figure: Checked at 2+ sites One reference monitor Low-cost sensors 1–2 sensors, not ranked About these marks

Low-cost sensors: consumer units, counted only in cities with no government-grade monitor; they read close to reference monitors on the whole, but 15 to 25% high in humid air. How we use them.

Good0–50

Moderate51–100

Unhealthy for sensitive groups101–150

Unhealthy151–200

Very unhealthy201–300

Hazardous301+

The US EPA's Air Quality Index for PM2.5 (2024 breakpoints). Show values as: µg/m³ · US AQI · India AQI · China AQI · European AQI · UK DAQI · Canada AQHI+. About the scales

Not covered: the government monitoring networks of China, Turkey and Iran, which publish only on their own websites. We are building the reader for China's network. The networks of Turkey and Iran don't answer requests from outside their countries, so we can't read them. Most cities there are missing from this board, not clean. Why.

Use this board

SmogRank, all cities ranked by mean PM2.5 (µg/m³), last 24 hours to 14 Oct 2026, 05:00 UTC: each city's mean of its hourly values, cities measured in 18 or more of the 24 hours. Monitor data from national networks via OpenAQ and the publishers listed at smogrank.com/sources. smogrank.com/rankings. Ranked on low-cost sensors, with no reference monitor in the city: #1 Gaur, Madhesh, #2 Kuala Lumpur, #4 Multan, #5 Faisalabad, #6 Gujranwala, #7 Lilongwe, #8 Lahore, #9 Dhaka and #10 Bahawalpur. Some values from Sensor.Community, ODbL. Some readings from Vietnam's government monitors; Uzhydromet (Uzbekistan's Hydrometeorological Service); Department of Environment, Nepal; Aurassure; RMCAB (Secretaría Distrital de Ambiente, Bogotá); Umhverfisstofnun (Environment Agency of Iceland), no reuse terms published.

Download top 10 (PNG)

You're welcome to reuse a single chart, image or figure with this citation and a link. Terms. Raw monitor readings in bulk are published by OpenAQ, under each provider's licence.

Updated 2026-10-14 05:07 UTC. Values are PM2.5 (fine particles), the median of each city's monitors, as the US AQI PM2.5 sub-index. Some low-cost readings: Sensor.Community, ODbL (data and licence). Some readings: Vietnam's government monitors; Uzhydromet (Uzbekistan's Hydrometeorological Service); Department of Environment, Nepal; Aurassure; RMCAB (Secretaría Distrital de Ambiente, Bogotá); Umhverfisstofnun (Environment Agency of Iceland), no reuse terms published (why we use them).