BizGapMap

Home / Limited-service restaurants (fast food) / New Hampshire / Rockingham County, NH

Rockingham County, NH — Fast food Saturation

How many fast food exist per person present — residents plus daytime workers — by ZIP code, compared with the U.S. average. Establishment data: Census ZBP 2023. Population: ACS 2024 5-year. 42 ZIP codes analyzed.

Includes: Fast food · Quick-service restaurants · Takeout & delivery counters · Pizza delivery · Sandwich & burger chains. Counted together because official statistics use one 722513 code.

Measured density: Above average — 1.08× the U.S. rate (between 1.08× and 1.19× once withheld ZIP cells are counted)

Why a range: Census does not publish a ZIP-by-industry count when that ZIP has 0–2 businesses. 21 ZIP cells in this county are withheld, 14 of them with residents. Each could hold 0, 1, or 2 businesses: counting them all as 0 gives the low end, counting them all as 2 gives the high end — the data cannot say where the truth sits. The density range uses only the populated cells, since ZIPs without residents are excluded from per-person rates. How ranges work

Range spans the U.S. rate   Rockingham County fast food — 108–119% of the U.S. rate

285 fast food are counted in Rockingham County — 7.2 per 10,000 people present (residents + daytime workers), 108% of the U.S. rate of 6.7.

On the comparable ZIP set (ZIPs with a published count in every year), the total has risen 5% between 2015 and 2023 (258 → 270). That set is smaller than today's county total. 2020–2021 were pandemic-distorted, and Census rounds counts, so small moves are within noise.

Measured supply density is highest in 03874 (Seabrook), 03842 (Hampton), 03042 (Epping) — well above the national rate. On measured density alone, the lowest-density residential ZIPs with a published count are 03857 (Newmarket), 03833 (Exeter), 03848 (Kingston).

BLS QCEW puts the latest county-wide count (2026 Q1) at 296 establishments, the freshest available signal.

Measured density: Rockingham County sits at 108% of the U.S. rate for fast food. 14 ZIPs with population have no published count (each 0–2 businesses), so the true per-capita rate is between 108% and 119% of the U.S. rate. Why. The highest measured density is in 03874 and 03842; the lowest measured density is in 03857 and 03833.

This is a supply-side read: it counts existing fast food and the people present, not foot traffic, income, rent, or whether locals want more. Treat low density as a question to check, not an answer.

Fast food
285–327
published count; upper bound counts each withheld ZIP cell as 2 (21 cells) (2023)
Per 10,000 present
7.2
residents + daytime workers
U.S. average
6.7
per 10,000 present
County index
1.08×
vs. U.S.
Latest quarter (QCEW)
296
2026 Q1 — county total
Residents
319,082
35 ZIPs with data
Workers
150,068
jobs located in county

Is the area growing?

Population
322,433
Census PEP, July 1 2024
Change since 2020
+2.5%
+7,769 people
Net migration 2024
+1,817
international +514, domestic +1,303
Jobs located here
163,015
LODES 2022, +2.8% since 2019

Rockingham County had an estimated 322,433 residents on July 1, 2024 — 2.5% more than in 2020 (+7,769). In the latest year it gained 1,768 people: births minus deaths −57, international migration +514, domestic migration +1,303. Components are published separately and may not sum exactly.

163,015 jobs were located in the county in 2022 (+2.8% since 2019), and 173,042 employed residents lived there (−0.2% since 2019). LODES counts wage and salary jobs covered by unemployment insurance plus federal jobs; it excludes the self-employed and military, and counts jobs rather than unique people. 2019→2022 spans the pandemic, so read it as one change, not a trend.

Population and migration say whether the customer base is growing. They do not say whether people want another business of this type. Definitions and limits →  ·  Full county detail →

ZIP gaining residents
2015–19 → 2020–24
Change
03032 Auburn
+12.4%
03087 Windham
+9.8%
03261 Northwood
+8.1%
ZIP losing residents
2015–19 → 2020–24
Change
03874 Seabrook
−4.9%
03858 Newton
−1.7%

ACS 5-year estimates for 2015–2019 and 2020–2024. Only ZIPs with at least 2,000 residents in both windows and a change larger than the survey margin of error (90%) are listed — small ZIPs move a lot on paper without a real signal.

Nonemployer businesses (no paid employees)

Nonemployer businesses
37
no paid employees (2024)
Receipts
$2.1M
published gross receipts
Receipts per business
$56K
gross, not profit

Census Nonemployer Statistics counts businesses with no paid employees — a separate universe from the employer establishments counted above; a business is in one or the other, never both. They are not storefronts by definition: many are home-based, mobile, or part-time.

We show them beside the density index, not inside it. In categories such as nail and beauty salons, child care, and pet care, one-person businesses can outnumber employer establishments, so the employer-only count understates how many businesses exist. That is not evidence of higher demand.

Receipts are gross revenue reported for these businesses — not profit, and not the size of the local market. Census publishes this only at county level, so it is not shown on the ZIP map. See methodology.

Saturation map

Each ZIP area is shaded by its density of this business type per person present (residents + workers) vs. the U.S. average. Click any ZIP to zoom to its boundary, see its numbers, and switch to aerial imagery. Individual mapped shops appear as dots at street level — Show locations zooms you in to them (scroll or double-click to zoom).

Basemap:
Under 50% 50–100% 100–150% 150–250% 250%+ 0–2 (not published) / no data ZIP total (dot size) Mapped shop (OpenStreetMap, street level)

Map data © OpenStreetMap contributors, tiles by OpenFreeMap.

White dots are ZIP totals from the official Census count — the bigger the dot, the more fast food in that ZIP. They are aggregated, not individual shops. Turquoise dots are individual locations mapped in OpenStreetMap, shown only at street level; they are crowd-sourced and indicative, may be incomplete, and do not equal the official counts. Only the official ZIP totals feed the saturation index.

Market trend — up 5% since 2015

Number of fast food in Rockingham County across 2015–2023, on a consistent set of ZIP codes present in every year — so changes are real, not ZIP-boundary artifacts. 2015/2018 are pre-pandemic baselines; 2020/2021 are COVID-distorted.

258
2015
283
2018
271
2020
275
2021
265
2022
270
2023

Highest measured density

ZIP
vs. U.S. average
Index
03874 Seabrook
299%
03842 Hampton
201%
03042 Epping
200%
03801 Portsmouth
185%
03079 Salem
174%
03865 Plaistow
120%
03038 Derry
101%
03087 Windham
97%
03885 Stratham
91%
03077 Raymond
84%
03870 Rye
77%
03053 Londonderry
75%
03848 Kingston
64%
03833 Exeter
61%
03857 Newmarket
59%

Lowest measured density

ZIP
vs. U.S. average
Index
03857 Newmarket
59%
03833 Exeter
61%
03848 Kingston
64%
03053 Londonderry
75%
03870 Rye
77%
03077 Raymond
84%
03885 Stratham
91%
03087 Windham
97%
03038 Derry
101%
03865 Plaistow
120%
03079 Salem
174%
03801 Portsmouth
185%
03042 Epping
200%
03842 Hampton
201%
03874 Seabrook
299%
Low measured density is not evidence of opportunity. A ZIP with few fast food may simply lack foot traffic, retail space, or demand. We rank only residential and mixed ZIPs here; employment hubs and visitor destinations are listed separately below. ZIPs where Census did not publish a count (0–2 businesses) are not ranked: they may be the least served of all, but the data cannot tell 0 from 1 or 2. Verify those locally.

All ZIP codes

Click a column header to sort. Index = fast food per 10,000 people present (residents + 0.5×workers) ÷ the U.S. average. 100% = exactly average.

ZIPNeighborhood ResidentsWorkersFast food Per 10kIndexStatus
03874Seabrook 8,4876,067 23 20.0 299% Very high density
03842Hampton 16,3244,586 25 13.4 201% High density
03042Epping 7,4303,169 12 13.3 200% High density
03801Portsmouth 23,48440,621 54 12.3 185% High density
03840Greenland 4,1061,955 6 11.8 177% High density
03079Salem 30,96422,357 49 11.6 174% High density
03844Hampton Falls 2,370430 3 11.6 174% High density
03862North Hampton 4,6102,116 6 10.6 159% High density
03826East Hampstead 2,654647 3 10.1 151% High density
03865Plaistow 7,8614,231 8 8.0 120% Above average
03038Derry 34,4748,343 26 6.7 101% Above average
03087Windham 16,0385,015 12 6.5 97% Below average
03034Candia 4,352766 3 6.3 95% Below average
03885Stratham 7,7544,154 6 6.1 91% Below average
03261Northwood 4,6881,112 3 5.7 86% Below average
03077Raymond 10,9003,168 7 5.6 84% Below average
03870Rye 5,1881,246 3 5.2 77% Below average
03053Londonderry 26,32715,179 17 5.0 75% Below average
03848Kingston 6,2751,409 3 4.3 64% Below average
03833Exeter 22,81712,999 12 4.1 61% Below average
03857Newmarket 9,4631,412 4 3.9 59% Below average
03032Auburn 6,1192,307 0–2 — — Not published
03036Chester 5,300408 0–2 — — Not published
03037Deerfield 4,714432 0–2 — — Not published
03041East Derry —23 0–2 — — Not published
03044Fremont 4,831609 0–2 — — Not published
03073North Salem —56 0–2 — — Not published
03290Nottingham 5,357230 0–2 — — Not published
03291West Nottingham 09 0–2 — — Not published
03802Portsmouth —190 0–2 — — Not published
03804Portsmouth —83 0–2 — — Not published
03811Atkinson 7,2671,243 0–2 — — Not published
03819Danville 4,471208 0–2 — — Not published
03827East Kingston 3,279383 0–2 — — Not published
03841Hampstead 6,5081,601 0–2 — — Not published
03843Hampton —241 0–2 — — Not published
03854New Castle 827357 0–2 — — Not published
03856Newfields 2,023467 0–2 — — Not published
03858Newton 4,836443 0–2 — — Not published
03859Newton Junction —46 0–2 — — Not published
03871Rye Beach 35688 0–2 — — Not published
03873Sandown 6,628310 0–2 — — Not published

Scroll the table sideways to see all columns.

Find an actual space in Portsmouth

The numbers above tell you how the market looks. To find a specific storefront, these marketplaces list available retail space for lease.

LoopNet
Largest commercial marketplace
Browse Portsmouth retail space →
Crexi
Free listings + market data
Browse Portsmouth retail space →
CityFeet
Retail space for lease
Browse Portsmouth retail space →

Open vacancy data (actual empty units) is only published by some cities; where it exists we show it directly. Listings above are third-party.

Census withholds some ZIP-by-industry cells to protect small businesses. 0–2 means the cell was not published (Census publishes industry counts only at 3+ per ZIP), so the ZIP is left unranked rather than counted as zero. ~ means the count is estimated from the broader industry group and can be off by a business or two.

Follow Rockingham County and fast food

When a data vintage changes or a section of this report is revised, we post it to a public update feed. No email address, no account, no tracking — and nothing is sent unless something actually changed.

Subscribe to updates (RSS) How these numbers are built →

Methodology & sources

Establishments. U.S. Census ZIP Code Business Patterns (ZBP 2023), NAICS 722513 — limited-service restaurants. Counts establishments with paid employees. ZBP is published annually with a ~2-year lag.

Fresh county signal. BLS QCEW (quarterly) is newer than ZBP — 2026 Q1 shows 296 establishments county-wide for this industry. It cannot be broken down by ZIP.

Population. U.S. Census American Community Survey 2024 5-year ZCTA population (table B01003). Workers are the ZIP's total employment from the same 2023 ZBP file.

Demand ("people present"). Demand comes from residents and daytime workers: residents + 0.5 × workers. This is the single documented assumption in the model and can be tuned.

Index. index = (ZIP establishments ÷ ZIP demand × 10,000) ÷ the U.S. average for this industry (6.67 per 10,000 present). It is a supply-side density measure; it does not capture income, rent, tourism, or whether locals actually want more.

Read the full methodology →  ·  Data sources & vintages →

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.