Home / Hotels & motels / Texas
How many hotels exist per person present (residents + daytime workers) across the 36 Texas counties we cover, by ZIP code, compared with the U.S. average. Data: Census ZBP 2023 + ACS 2024 + BLS QCEW.
Includes: Hotels · Motels · Motor inns. Counted together because official statistics use one 721110 code.
| City | County | Hotels | Residents | Workers | Per 10k | Index | Verdict |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Midland | Midland County | 56–66 | 168,494 | 91,917 | 2.6 | 189% | High density |
| Abilene | Taylor County | 44–70 | 154,753 | 57,557 | 2.4 | 174–245% | High density |
| Corpus Christi | Nueces County | 96–144 | 351,950 | 130,507 | 2.3 | 167–212% | High density |
| Odessa | Ector County | 46–62 | 171,416 | 72,071 | 2.2 | 161–189% | High density |
| Woodway | McLennan County | 64–106 | 270,919 | 111,818 | 2.0 | 142–217% | Range spans bands |
| Beaumont | Jefferson County | 59–87 | 252,884 | 102,594 | 1.9 | 140–179% | Range spans bands |
| League City | Galveston County | 81–107 | 379,923 | 101,205 | 1.9 | 136–163% | Range spans bands |
| San Marcos | Hays County | 58–64 | 286,831 | 81,054 | 1.8 | 128–137% | Above average |
| Lubbock | Lubbock County | 65–103 | 311,047 | 122,184 | 1.7 | 127–165% | Range spans bands |
| Wichita Falls | Wichita County | 27–47 | 136,053 | 45,003 | 1.7 | 123–196% | Range spans bands |
| New Braunfels | Comal County | 41–51 | 215,245 | 64,040 | 1.7 | 120–144% | Above average |
| College Station | Brazos County | 45–67 | 241,659 | 78,858 | 1.6 | 116–142% | Above average |
| Harlingen | Cameron County | 77–103 | 425,007 | 121,999 | 1.6 | 115–142% | Above average |
| Dallas | Dallas County | 561–719 | 2,736,443 | 1,654,497 | 1.6 | 113–125% | Above average |
| Temple | Bell County | 69–97 | 399,960 | 95,282 | 1.5 | 112–141% | Above average |
| San Antonio | Bexar County | 344–442 | 2,044,549 | 788,736 | 1.4 | 102–123% | Above average |
| Houston | Harris County | 833–1,081 | 4,866,005 | 2,159,333 | 1.4 | 101–112% | Above average |
| Pearland | Brazoria County | 61–83 | 410,979 | 98,139 | 1.3 | 96–115% | Range spans bands |
| Weatherford | Parker County | 21–37 | 147,840 | 33,831 | 1.3 | 92–145% | Range spans bands |
| Austin | Travis County | 209–303 | 1,302,098 | 733,329 | 1.3 | 91–112% | Range spans bands |
| Tyler | Smith County | 37–69 | 247,103 | 98,064 | 1.2 | 90–149% | Range spans bands |
| Laredo | Webb County | 36–50 | 269,130 | 83,205 | 1.2 | 84–112% | Range spans bands |
| Fort Worth | Tarrant County | 288–386 | 2,091,100 | 824,477 | 1.2 | 83–100% | Below average |
| Burleson | Johnson County | 27–43 | 215,467 | 52,226 | 1.1 | 81–123% | Range spans bands |
| Sugar Land | Fort Bend County | 98–128 | 855,396 | 228,133 | 1.0 | 73–91% | Below average |
| Sherman | Grayson County | 17–49 | 148,078 | 43,079 | 1.0 | 73–201% | Range spans bands |
| Terrell | Kaufman County | 19–35 | 183,309 | 36,313 | 0.9 | 68–119% | Range spans bands |
| Schertz | Guadalupe County | 17–31 | 157,840 | 50,580 | 0.9 | 67–107% | Range spans bands |
| Frisco | Denton County | 103–147 | 978,658 | 345,999 | 0.9 | 65–86% | Below average |
| Amarillo | Randall County | 14–24 | 144,098 | 41,104 | 0.9 | 62–97% | Below average |
| Plano | Collin County | 109–139 | 1,115,497 | 422,851 | 0.8 | 59–73% | Range spans bands |
| Cedar Park | Williamson County | 63–97 | 691,052 | 187,105 | 0.8 | 58–77% | Range spans bands |
| Mcallen | Hidalgo County | 80–122 | 891,915 | 226,099 | 0.8 | 58–84% | Range spans bands |
| El Paso | El Paso County | 76–136 | 871,270 | 253,085 | 0.8 | 55–83% | Range spans bands |
| Waxahachie | Ellis County | 18–44 | 222,795 | 52,087 | 0.7 | 52–116% | Range spans bands |
| Spring | Montgomery County | 45–79 | 671,730 | 197,300 | 0.6 | 42–67% | Range spans bands |
Scroll the table sideways to see all columns.
← All Hotels & motels markets nationwide · Methodology · Data sources
BizGapMap — free, no-login small-business saturation reports for major U.S. counties. Built entirely from public U.S. Census, BLS, and IRS data (ZBP 2023, ACS 2024 5-year, PEP 2024, LODES, QCEW, IRS SOI). No forecasts, no revenue guesses — withheld cells are marked, and the few derived counts are labelled as estimates.