SmogRank / Rankings

All 2,540 cities by PM2.5, last 24 hours

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

CPCB in India: no readings since 7 Oct (488 monitors). EEA in Spain: no readings since 10 Oct (310 monitors). Catalonia Medi Ambient I Sostenibilitat in Spain: no readings since 9 Oct (26 monitors). Their cities are missing from this board, not clean.

  1. 500SakadoSaitama, Japan 550.8×▼46
  2. 500NaganoNagano, Japan 550.8×▲188
  3. 500AtamiShizuoka, Japan 550.8×▲24
  4. 500Recklinghausenlow-cost sensorsNorth Rhine-Westphalia, Germany 550.8×
  5. 500MarionArkansas, United States 550.8×▼12
  6. 500BurnsvilleMinnesota, United States 550.8×
  7. 500Saint PaulMinnesota, United States 550.8×
  8. 500ChangnyeongGyeongsangnam-do, South Korea 550.8×▼212
  9. 500YawatahamaEhime, Japan 550.8×▼65
  10. 500YufuOita, Japan 550.8×
  11. 511BelgradeCentral Serbia, Serbia 550.8×▼123
  12. 511HaenamJeollanam-do, South Korea 550.8×▼243
  13. 511HachiōjiTokyo, Japan 550.8×▼99
  14. 511ToowoombaQueensland, Australia 550.8×▲367
  15. 511PljevljaPljevlja, Montenegro 550.8×▼163
  16. 511MexicaliBaja California, Mexico 550.8×▲242
  17. 511Wood RiverIllinois, United States 550.8×▲166
  18. 511HattiesburgMississippi, United States 550.8×▲507
  19. 511Elmwood Parklow-cost sensorsIllinois, United States 550.8×
  20. 511WyomingMichigan, United States 550.8×▲69
  21. 511LimaOhio, United States 550.8×▲70
  22. 511EurekaCalifornia, United States 550.8×▲114
  23. 511IrumaSaitama, Japan 550.8×▼27
  24. 511SaikaiNagasaki, Japan 550.8×▲102
  25. 525MungyeongGyeongsangbuk-do, South Korea 550.8×▼170
  26. 525Port MacquarieNew South Wales, Australia 550.8×▲486
  27. 525TimaruCanterbury, New Zealand 550.8×▲206
  28. 525Abidjanlow-cost sensorsAbidjan Autonomous District, Ivory Coast 550.8×▲207
  29. 525RužomberokŽilina Region, Slovakia 550.8×▲518
  30. 525ChikumaNagano, Japan 550.8×▲362
  31. 531PyeongchangGangwon-do, South Korea 550.7×▼219
  32. 531Jeju CityJeju-do, South Korea 550.7×▲87
  33. 531TakahashiOkayama, Japan 550.7×▲109
  34. 531MinatoWakayama, Japan 550.7×▼36
  35. 531ObitaNagasaki, Japan 550.7×▲209
  36. 531MaryboroughQueensland, Australia 550.7×▼193
  37. 531Upper AltonIllinois, United States 550.7×▲145
  38. 531ClovisCalifornia, United States 550.7×▲68
  39. 531MaderaCalifornia, United States 550.7×▲420
  40. 531Sunshine CoastQueensland, Australia 550.7×▲260
  41. 541TomiokaKumamoto, Japan 550.7×▲557
  42. 541HitoyoshiKumamoto, Japan 550.7×▲593
  43. 541Santa AnitaJalisco, Mexico 550.7×▼179
  44. 541FujiyoshidaYamanashi, Japan 550.7×▲61
  45. 541AsakuchiOkayama, Japan 550.7×▼154
  46. 546MackayQueensland, Australia 550.7×▲119
  47. 546Sainte-Geneviève-des-BoisÎle-de-France, France 550.7×▲77
  48. 546DoltonIllinois, United States 550.7×▲356
  49. 546Prince GeorgeBritish Columbia, Canada 550.7×▲1237
  50. 550ShiroishiMiyagi, Japan 540.7×▼124
  51. 550IwanumaMiyagi, Japan 540.7×▼185
  52. 550ŽilinaŽilina Region, Slovakia 540.7×▲395
  53. 550NovaraPiedmont, Italy 540.7×▲278
  54. 550ClintonIowa, United States 540.7×▲384
  55. 550Calumet CityIllinois, United States 540.7×▲442
  56. 550LincolnwoodIllinois, United States 540.7×▲417
  57. 550Nileslow-cost sensorsIllinois, United States 540.7×
  58. 550KalamazooMichigan, United States 540.7×▲629
  59. 550FresnoCalifornia, United States 540.7×▲50
  60. 550NankokuKochi, Japan 540.7×▼13
  61. 561PhatthalungPhatthalung, Thailand 540.7×▼97
  62. 561YeonilGyeongsangbuk-do, South Korea 540.7×▼219
  63. 561YeongjuGyeongsangbuk-do, South Korea 540.7×▼257
  64. 561DaeguDaegu, South Korea 540.7×▼161
  65. 561NangenJeollabuk-do, South Korea 540.7×▼309
  66. 561KwangyangJeollanam-do, South Korea 540.7×▼159
  67. 561ZentsujichóKagawa, Japan 540.7×▲14
  68. 561NōgataFukuoka, Japan 540.7×▲69
  69. 561KoshigayaSaitama, Japan 540.7×▼5
  70. 561IyoEhime, Japan 540.7×▼105
  71. 561Norderstedtlow-cost sensorsSchleswig-Holstein, Germany 540.7×
  72. 572HengchunTaiwan, Taiwan 540.7×▼10
  73. 572YecheonGyeongsangbuk-do, South Korea 540.7×▼308
  74. 572SendaiKagoshima, Japan 540.7×▲417
  75. 572OyamaTochigi, Japan 540.7×▼22
  76. 572GifuGifu, Japan 540.7×▼62
  77. 572KumaEhime, Japan 540.7×▲4
  78. 572KawasakiMiyagi, Japan 540.7×▼54
  79. 572Dakarlow-cost sensorsDakar, Senegal 540.7×▼237
  80. 572Sindelfingenlow-cost sensorsBaden-Wurttemberg, Germany 540.7×
  81. 572Valašské MeziříčíZlín, Czechia 540.7×▲874
  82. 572HavířovMoravian-Silesian Region, Czechia 540.7×▲689
  83. 572Tula de AllendeHidalgo, Mexico 540.7×▼176
  84. 572Skokielow-cost sensorsIllinois, United States 540.7×
  85. 572Apple ValleyMinnesota, United States 540.7×
  86. 586NajuJeollanam-do, South Korea 540.7×▼449
  87. 586Gyeongsan-siGyeongsangbuk-do, South Korea 540.7×▼217
  88. 586SuzukaMie, Japan 540.7×▼241
  89. 586SayamaSaitama, Japan 540.7×▼53
  90. 586Tagajō-shiMiyagi, Japan 540.7×▼129
  91. 586PrichardAlabama, United States 540.7×▲715
  92. 586DecaturIllinois, United States 540.7×▲458
  93. 586NapervilleIllinois, United States 540.7×▲506
  94. 586BlaineMinnesota, United States 540.7×
  95. 586AzaminoKanagawa, Japan 540.7×▼42
  96. 586MimaTokushima, Japan 540.7×▲5
  97. 597Nakhon NayokNakhon Nayok, Thailand 540.7×▼24
  98. 597GwangjuGwangju, South Korea 540.7×▼380
  99. 597ChangsuJeollabuk-do, South Korea 540.7×▼193
  100. 597TakeharaHiroshima, Japan 540.7×▼226

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
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 and Turkey, which publish only on their own websites. We are building the reader for China's network. Turkey's network doesn't answer requests from outside the country, so we can't read it. 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 13 Oct 2026, 01:00 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 Queenstown Estate, #3 Gaur, Madhesh, #5 Dubai, #6 Dhaka, #7 Multan, #8 Faisalabad, #9 Gujranwala and #10 Vientiane. Some values from Sensor.Community, ODbL. Some readings from Uzhydromet (Uzbekistan's Hydrometeorological Service); Vietnam's government monitors; Department of Environment, Nepal; Aurassure; RMCAB (Secretaría Distrital de Ambiente, Bogotá); Umhverfisstofnun (Environment Agency of Iceland); Love My Air (City and County of Denver), 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 2026-10-13 01:07 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: Uzhydromet (Uzbekistan's Hydrometeorological Service); Vietnam's government monitors; Department of Environment, Nepal; Aurassure; RMCAB (Secretaría Distrital de Ambiente, Bogotá); Umhverfisstofnun (Environment Agency of Iceland); Love My Air (City and County of Denver), no reuse terms published (why we use them).