Walker, MO population, income and ZIP codes

Walker city is a very small community in Missouri, with 371 residents counted in the Census American Community Survey 2019-2023 ACS 5-year estimates, which places it #592 of 1,082 ranked by population — larger than 45% of them. The median age here is 49.3 years against 39.1 nationally, a markedly older profile that usually tracks retirees staying put and younger households leaving for work. At this population the ACS sample is small, so the margin of error around every dollar figure below is wide — treat the numbers as a band, not a point, and expect them to move between annual releases without the place itself changing.

Households in Walker city earn a median of $29,922 a year, 61.9% below the national figure of $78,538 and 46% below the $55,543 median for the 374 Missouri cities we cover. Household income here is measured before tax and pooled across everyone at the address, which is why it reads higher than typical individual earnings in the same area. Poverty reaches 20.5% of residents here, well above the 12.4% national rate, which is the single clearest signal in this dataset that median income here is carried by a narrow band of households.

The typical owner-occupied home in Walker city is valued at not published, while median gross rent runs $610 a month, 56.6% below the national figure, or roughly $7,320 across a full year. A household on the local median income would put about 24.5% of gross pay toward that rent against the federal 30% cost-burden threshold, so renting here is within the standard affordability guideline. 75.9% of occupied homes are owner-occupied versus 65% nationally, so the market leans toward owners. Gross rent folds in the utilities a tenant pays separately, so it is closer to the real monthly outlay than a headline rent figure.

With 371 residents, a handful of survey responses moves every median on this page. Compare Walker city against its county rather than against national figures.

The Census withheld home value for Walker city because the sample was too thin to publish at this geography. Those values were suppressed at the source, not lost in our dataset, and we do not model a replacement. Everything else on this page comes straight from the ACS 2019-2023 ACS 5-year tables.