Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
Fact check: What is the crime rate of portland compared to nashville
Executive Summary
Portland and Nashville have both been described as having crime rates above the national average in the provided analyses, but the magnitude and recent trends differ: one dataset reports Portland with a substantially higher overall crime rate than Nashville (7076 vs. 4927 crimes per 100,000), while more recent local reporting shows declines in key violent-crime measures for both cities. The sources present competing narratives—static crime-rate snapshots that paint Portland as notably worse [1] [2] versus recent local reports highlighting year-to-date declines and community impacts that complicate simple comparisons [3] [4].
1. Startling Snapshot: Numbers That Make Portland Look Much Worse
The comparative snapshot in the supplied dataset shows Portland at 7076 crimes per 100,000 people—driven by reported figures of 4,733 violent crimes and 39,852 property crimes—and labels that as 204.4% above the national average [1]. By contrast, the same collection lists Nashville at 4,927 crimes per 100,000, with 7,491 violent crimes and 25,991 property crimes and a claim of 112% above the national average [2]. These figures frame Portland as having both a higher per-capita total crime rate and a larger gap relative to the national benchmark, creating a headline impression that Portland is more dangerous than Nashville when using those metrics [1] [2].
2. Recent Local Reporting Tells a More Nuanced Story About Portland
Local coverage from September 2025 counters blanket characterizations by reporting substantial declines in some violent-crime categories in Portland, including a 52% drop in homicides and a 33% decrease in recorded shootings from January to August of that year [3]. Those trends complicate the static 7076-per-100,000 figure by showing short-term reductions in the most acute violent incidents, suggesting that crime trajectories can shift within a single year and that year-to-date declines may not be reflected in older or aggregated rate snapshots [3].
3. Nashville’s Trends Also Show Improvement, Undermining a Simple Comparison
Nashville’s most recent reporting from late September 2025 shows across-the-board declines, with the Metro Nashville Police Department describing violent offenses down 14.4% and property offenses down 10.6% for the period covered [4]. Other local coverage cites specific reductions—15% in burglary and 10% in auto theft—and highlights operational responses like increased use of license-plate readers [5]. These local trend reports indicate that, like Portland, Nashville is experiencing measurable short-term improvements, which means raw per-100,000 snapshots may overstate current divergence between the cities [4] [5].
4. Context Matters: Different Data Windows and Definitions Create Confusion
The provided sources mix aggregate rate snapshots [1] [2] with short-term trend reporting [3] [4]. Aggregate figures can be drawn from multi-year compilations or differing reporting periods, while trend reports often cover year-to-date or seasonal intervals. This means that apparent contradictions—Portland’s high per-capita rate vs. reported decreases in homicides and shootings—can coexist because they reference different timeframes or subsets of crime categories. The materials also point to policy and local events (homeless-shelter debates, neighborhood responses) as influences that are reported differently across outlets [6] [7].
5. What the analyses omit—and why that matters to comparisons
The supplied materials do not consistently standardize for population changes, reporting practices, or precisely matched timeframes, and they rarely break down rates by neighborhood, demographic group, or type of property vs. violent crime beyond headline categories [1] [2] [3]. The narrative pieces about Portland’s shelter and neighborhood actions document local social conditions—public drug use, vandalism, community responses—that are relevant to lived safety but are not captured in per-100,000 crime-rate snapshots [7] [6]. The absence of aligned timeframes and methodology makes a direct apples-to-apples comparison between Portland and Nashville from these sources alone inconclusive.
6. Reconciling the competing narratives: practical takeaway for readers
From the assembled sources, the practical conclusion is that Portland’s historic or aggregated crime rate figures appear higher than Nashville’s, according to one dataset [1] [2], but both cities reported meaningful declines in crime during 2025, per local police and news reports [3] [4]. For a definitive, current comparison you would need matched-year, city-reported crime rates per 100,000 using the same definitions and time windows, plus neighborhood-level context and trends for the categories you care about—violent crime versus property crime, for example—which the provided sources do not fully deliver [1] [2] [3] [4].
7. Final note on narratives and agendas in the coverage
The assembled sources reflect competing agendas: one set emphasizes alarming aggregate rankings that spotlight Portland as among the most dangerous [1] [2], while local reporting focuses on improvements and community impacts that can downplay or contextualize those rankings [3] [6] [7] [4]. Readers should treat broad-rate headlines and short-term trend claims as complementary rather than mutually exclusive, and seek matched, contemporaneous datasets if they require a precise comparative judgment between Portland and Nashville [1] [3] [4].