SmogRank / Rankings

All 2,504 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. 1Queenstown Estatelow-cost sensorsSingapore 196 US AQI8.0 times the WHO guideline
  2. 2SingaporeSingapore 187 US AQI7.1 times the WHO guideline
  3. 3Gaurlow-cost sensorsMadhesh, Nepal 174 US AQI5.9 times the WHO guideline
  4. 4Dubailow-cost sensorsDubai, United Arab Emirates 172 US AQI5.7 times the WHO guideline▲28
  5. 5eManzimtotiKwaZulu-Natal, South Africa 170 US AQI5.5 times the WHO guideline▼4
  6. 6Dhakalow-cost sensorsDhaka Division, Bangladesh 169 US AQI5.4 times the WHO guideline▼2
  7. 7Multanlow-cost sensorsPunjab, Pakistan 163 US AQI4.8 times the WHO guideline▲19
  8. 8Gujranwalalow-cost sensorsPunjab, Pakistan 161 US AQI4.6 times the WHO guideline▲34
  9. 9Faisalabadlow-cost sensorsPunjab, Pakistan 161 US AQI4.6 times the WHO guideline▲11
  10. 10Lahorelow-cost sensorsPunjab, Pakistan 160 US AQI4.5 times the WHO guideline▲17
  11. 11Vientianelow-cost sensorsVientiane Prefecture, Laos 156 US AQI4.2 times the WHO guideline▼1
  12. 12Lilongwelow-cost sensorsCentral Region, Malawi 156 US AQI4.2 times the WHO guideline▲12
  13. 13Hyderabadlow-cost sensorsSindh, Pakistan 152 US AQI3.8 times the WHO guideline
  14. 14NukusKarakalpakstan, Uzbekistan 152 US AQI3.8 times the WHO guideline▼1
  15. 15HanoiHanoi, Vietnam 142 US AQI3.5 times the WHO guideline▼9
  16. 16Zombalow-cost sensorsSouthern Region, Malawi 142 US AQI3.5 times the WHO guideline▲13
  17. 17Bahawalpurlow-cost sensorsPunjab, Pakistan 141 US AQI3.5 times the WHO guideline▲29
  18. 18Karongalow-cost sensorsNorthern Region, Malawi 141 US AQI3.4 times the WHO guideline
  19. 19Kinshasalow-cost sensorsKinshasa, Democratic Republic of the Congo 138 US AQI3.4 times the WHO guideline
  20. 20Changchunlow-cost sensorsJilin, China 135 US AQI3.3 times the WHO guideline▼17
  21. 21Ubudlow-cost sensorsBali, Indonesia 134 US AQI3.3 times the WHO guideline▼5
  22. 22Sirahalow-cost sensorsMadhesh, Nepal 134 US AQI3.2 times the WHO guideline
  23. 23Tabananlow-cost sensorsBali, Indonesia 132 US AQI3.2 times the WHO guideline▼15
  24. 24Kuala Lumpurlow-cost sensorsKuala Lumpur, Malaysia 131 US AQI3.2 times the WHO guideline
  25. 25BukharaBukhara, Uzbekistan 131 US AQI3.2 times the WHO guideline▲10
  26. 26Denpasarlow-cost sensorsBali, Indonesia 130 US AQI3.2 times the WHO guideline▼9
  27. 27Dalunglow-cost sensorsBali, Indonesia 130 US AQI3.1 times the WHO guideline▼13
  28. 28Mzuzulow-cost sensorsNorthern Region, Malawi 129 US AQI3.1 times the WHO guideline▼13
  29. 29Roermondlow-cost sensorsLimburg, The Netherlands 128 US AQI3.1 times the WHO guideline
  30. 30Peshawarlow-cost sensorsKhyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan 127 US AQI3.1 times the WHO guideline
  31. 31Jammulow-cost sensorsJammu and Kashmir, India 124 US AQI3.0 times the WHO guideline▼9
  32. 32Sialkotlow-cost sensorsPunjab, Pakistan 121 US AQI2.9 times the WHO guideline▲47
  33. 33Karachilow-cost sensorsSindh, Pakistan 120 US AQI2.9 times the WHO guideline
  34. 34TŭytepaTashkent Region, Uzbekistan 119 US AQI2.9 times the WHO guideline▼11
  35. 35Rawalpindilow-cost sensorsPunjab, Pakistan 116 US AQI2.8 times the WHO guideline▲6
  36. 36Blantyrelow-cost sensorsSouthern Region, Malawi 114 US AQI2.7 times the WHO guideline▲24
  37. 37TuxtlaChiapas, Mexico 110 US AQI2.6 times the WHO guideline▲43
  38. 38QibrayTashkent Region, Uzbekistan 109 US AQI2.6 times the WHO guideline▲46
  39. 39Islamabadlow-cost sensorsIslamabad, Pakistan 109 US AQI2.6 times the WHO guideline▼8
  40. 40Dhangaḍhi̇̄Sudurpashchim Pradesh, Nepal 107 US AQI2.5 times the WHO guideline▲7
  41. 41DurbanKwaZulu-Natal, South Africa 106 US AQI2.5 times the WHO guideline▼32
  42. 42Butwāllow-cost sensorsLumbini Province, Nepal 103 US AQI2.4 times the WHO guideline▲13
  43. 43SalorTashkent Region, Uzbekistan 103 US AQI2.4 times the WHO guideline▲61
  44. 44TashkentTashkent, Uzbekistan 99 US AQI2.3 times the WHO guideline▲86
  45. 45OlmaliqTashkent Region, Uzbekistan 98 US AQI2.3 times the WHO guideline▼33
  46. =46Khon KaenKhon Kaen, Thailand 97 US AQI2.3 times the WHO guideline▲111
  47. =46Abujalow-cost sensorsFCT, Nigeria 97 US AQI2.3 times the WHO guideline▲18
  48. 48Istanbullow-cost sensorsIstanbul, Turkey 96 US AQI2.2 times the WHO guideline
  49. 49Ibadanlow-cost sensorsOyo State, Nigeria 95 US AQI2.2 times the WHO guideline▲76
  50. 50SasolburgFree State, South Africa 95 US AQI2.2 times the WHO guideline▲57
  51. 51Gimpo-siGyeonggi-do, South Korea 94 US AQI2.2 times the WHO guideline▲65
  52. 52JanakpurMadhesh, Nepal 93 US AQI2.1 times the WHO guideline▲36
  53. 53Murreelow-cost sensorsPunjab, Pakistan 92 US AQI2.1 times the WHO guideline
  54. 54BanepāBagmati Province, Nepal 91 US AQI2.1 times the WHO guideline▼3
  55. 55Iloilolow-cost sensorsWestern Visayas, Philippines 91 US AQI2.0 times the WHO guideline▲12
  56. 56Madhyapur ThimiBagmati Province, Nepal 90 US AQI2.0 times the WHO guideline▲26
  57. 57Ansan-siGyeonggi-do, South Korea 90 US AQI2.0 times the WHO guideline▲118
  58. 58DeukhurīLumbini Province, Nepal 90 US AQI2.0 times the WHO guideline▲11
  59. 59TangjinChungcheongnam-do, South Korea 90 US AQI2.0 times the WHO guideline▼29
  60. =60LeslieMpumalanga, South Africa 89 US AQI2.0 times the WHO guideline▲1
  61. =60Goyang-siGyeonggi-do, South Korea 89 US AQI2.0 times the WHO guideline▲71
  62. 62VereenigingGauteng, South Africa 89 US AQI2.0 times the WHO guideline▲6
  63. =63Roi EtRoi Et, Thailand 89 US AQI2.0 times the WHO guideline▲87
  64. =63Wan ChaiWan Chai, Hong Kong 89 US AQI2.0 times the WHO guideline▲12
  65. 65Bang Pakonglow-cost sensorsChachoengsao, Thailand 88 US AQI1.9 times the WHO guideline▲1277
  66. =66EmalahleniMpumalanga, South Africa 88 US AQI1.9 times the WHO guideline▲345
  67. =66Talgharlow-cost sensorsAlmaty Region, Kazakhstan 88 US AQI1.9 times the WHO guideline▼45
  68. =66IncheonIncheon, South Korea 88 US AQI1.9 times the WHO guideline▲69
  69. =66Hwaseong-siGyeonggi-do, South Korea 88 US AQI1.9 times the WHO guideline▲115
  70. =70KwaDukuzaKwaZulu-Natal, South Africa 88 US AQI1.9 times the WHO guideline
  71. =70ZhongliaoTaiwan, Taiwan 88 US AQI1.9 times the WHO guideline▲127
  72. =72Jouniehlow-cost sensorsMount Lebanon, Lebanon 87 US AQI1.9 times the WHO guideline▼2
  73. =72KalasinKalasin, Thailand 87 US AQI1.9 times the WHO guideline▲133
  74. 74ErlinTaiwan, Taiwan 87 US AQI1.9 times the WHO guideline▲74
  75. 75Maha SarakhamMaha Sarakham, Thailand 86 US AQI1.9 times the WHO guideline▲191
  76. 76YuanlinTaiwan, Taiwan 86 US AQI1.9 times the WHO guideline▲46
  77. 77BuziTaiwan, Taiwan 86 US AQI1.9 times the WHO guideline▲233
  78. =78ErlunTaiwan, Taiwan 86 US AQI1.8 times the WHO guideline▲65
  79. =78GwangmyeongGyeonggi-do, South Korea 86 US AQI1.8 times the WHO guideline▲66
  80. 80YeojuGyeonggi-do, South Korea 85 US AQI1.8 times the WHO guideline▲59
  81. 81KanchanaburiKanchanaburi, Thailand 85 US AQI1.8 times the WHO guideline▼3
  82. 82MukdahanMukdahan, Thailand 84 US AQI1.8 times the WHO guideline▲30
  83. 83TaichungTaiwan, Taiwan 84 US AQI1.8 times the WHO guideline▲175
  84. 84PinetownKwaZulu-Natal, South Africa 84 US AQI1.8 times the WHO guideline▼32
  85. 85Udon ThaniUdon Thani, Thailand 83 US AQI1.8 times the WHO guideline▲175
  86. 86Regensburglow-cost sensorsBavaria, Germany 83 US AQI1.8 times the WHO guideline
  87. =87Nakhon RatchasimaNakhon Ratchasima, Thailand 82 US AQI1.7 times the WHO guideline▲190
  88. =87Buri RamBuriram, Thailand 82 US AQI1.7 times the WHO guideline▲371
  89. =87Guri-siGyeonggi-do, South Korea 82 US AQI1.7 times the WHO guideline▲129
  90. 90Samut SakhonSamut Sakhon, Thailand 82 US AQI1.7 times the WHO guideline▲21
  91. 91Kampalalow-cost sensorsCentral Region, Uganda 82 US AQI1.7 times the WHO guideline▼33
  92. 92PyeongtaekGyeonggi-do, South Korea 82 US AQI1.7 times the WHO guideline▼3
  93. 93ChanghuaTaiwan, Taiwan 82 US AQI1.7 times the WHO guideline▲68
  94. =94eMbalenhleMpumalanga, South Africa 81 US AQI1.7 times the WHO guideline▲206
  95. =94Quezon Citylow-cost sensorsNational Capital Region, Philippines 81 US AQI1.7 times the WHO guideline▲133
  96. 96Santiaguito TlalcilalcalliMéxico, Mexico 81 US AQI1.7 times the WHO guideline▲125
  97. =97DouliuTaiwan, Taiwan 81 US AQI1.7 times the WHO guideline▲8
  98. =97Bucheon-siGyeonggi-do, South Korea 81 US AQI1.7 times the WHO guideline▲69
  99. =97Ganghwa-gunIncheon, South Korea 81 US AQI1.7 times the WHO guideline▲12
  100. 100Yongsan-dongSeoul, South Korea 81 US AQI1.7 times the WHO guideline▲104

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 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, 03:00 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, #4 Dubai, #6 Dhaka, #7 Multan, #8 Gujranwala, #9 Faisalabad and #10 Lahore. 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), 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 03:07 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), no reuse terms published (why we use them).