Round Mountain, TX population, income and ZIP codes

Round Mountain town is a very small community in Texas, with 95 residents counted in the Census American Community Survey 2019-2023 ACS 5-year estimates, which places it #1680 of 1,863 ranked by population — larger than 9% of them. The median age here is 51.5 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 Round Mountain town earn a median of $96,250 a year, 22.6% above the national figure of $78,538 and 49% above the $64,654 median for the 1,008 Texas cities we cover. Median household income counts every pre-tax dollar arriving at an address — wages, self-employment, Social Security, pensions, interest and public assistance — for everyone living there, so multi-earner households pull the figure up even where individual pay is modest. Poverty reaches 2.1% of residents here, less than half the 12.4% national rate.

The typical owner-occupied home in Round Mountain town is valued at not published, while median gross rent runs not published a month. 66.7% 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.

A median age of 51.5 puts Round Mountain town well into retirement-weighted territory, which pulls median household income down even where household wealth is high, because retirement draws are counted differently from wages. With 95 residents, a handful of survey responses moves every median on this page. Compare Round Mountain town against its county rather than against national figures.

The Census withheld home value, gross rent for Round Mountain town 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.