How do murder rates in US cities compare to international cities?
This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.
Executive summary
Murder rates in U.S. cities vary widely: a handful of American cities register homicide rates among the highest for major urban areas (e.g., New Orleans, Memphis, St. Louis), while large U.S. metros with many homicides in absolute terms often have lower rates because of population size (e.g., Chicago, Los Angeles) [1] [2]. International comparisons are difficult and can mislead unless methodological differences—city boundaries, data years, and reporting practices—are accounted for [3] [4].
1. How U.S. city homicide figures look on paper
Recent compilations show U.S. cities with very high per‑capita homicide rates: Visual Capitalist and related trackers list New Orleans at roughly 46 homicides per 100,000 and Memphis and St. Louis in the high 30s per 100,000, placing them among the most violent major U.S. cities by rate [1] [2]. At the same time, absolute counts concentrate in large counties or metropolitan areas—Cook County reported 805 homicides in 2023 and Los Angeles County 659, illustrating how totals and rates tell different stories [5] [2].
2. Why direct city‑to‑city international comparisons are fraught
Global lists of city homicide rates caution that city boundaries and metro area definitions distort comparisons: the population within municipal borders may not represent an urban region and can create misleading per‑capita figures, and some global compilations exclude active war zones to avoid distortion [3]. The FBI and criminology bodies also warn against simple rankings from UCR data, noting they “fail to account for the many conditions affecting crime rates” and can be misleading [4].
3. Recent U.S. trends change the backdrop for comparisons
Violence in U.S. cities has shifted year by year: a broad 2025 decline in crime included an estimated 20% drop in murders according to the Real Time Crime Index and NPR’s synthesis of local data, while other analyses show homicide levels in many sampled cities fell to about 6% below 2019 in a year‑end 2024 review by the Council on Criminal Justice [6] [7]. Yet the Council also documents that from 2020–2024 there were roughly 13,500 more homicide victims than in 2015–2019, underscoring a recent spike before those declines [8].
4. What that means for U.S. vs. international cities
When methodologically comparable lists exist, some U.S. cities do rank among the world’s most violent large cities by homicide rate, but the phenomenon is localized: a small subset of U.S. municipalities report very high per‑capita homicide rates while many other large U.S. metros have lower rates despite high totals [1] [2]. Any claim that “U.S. cities are uniformly more murderous than international peers” is not supported by the data in the sources, which instead show heterogeneity and the strong influence of measurement choices [3] [4].
5. Caveats, competing narratives and hidden agendas in the data
Multiple sources and expert panels explicitly warn that rankings attract attention and can distort public perception; the FBI recommends against using its data for simplistic rankings and the American Society of Criminology has opposed city ranking uses of the UCR for failing to account for structural drivers [4]. Data purveyors and media visualizations emphasize dramatic city rankings because they garner clicks, while policy advocates may highlight either progress (recent drops) or persistent harms (excess deaths 2020–24) to advance different reforms [6] [8].
6. Bottom line for readers comparing murder rates internationally
U.S. cities include examples at both extremes—some with among the highest per‑capita homicides globally and many with moderate or low rates—so comparisons to international cities require careful alignment of definitions, timeframes and populations; without that, conclusions will be partial at best and misleading at worst [3] [4]. The most defensible takeaways from available reporting are that homicide patterns are geographically concentrated, that recent U.S. trends show both a prior spike and subsequent declines, and that rankings must be interpreted alongside methodological caveats [7] [6] [8].