Every day, millions of Americans search for coupon codes before completing an online purchase. But not every city shops the same way. SimplyCodes analyzed 12.4 million coupon search sessions across more than 10,000 U.S. cities to find out where Americans hunt for deals the hardest — and where they barely bother at all.
The results reveal a striking divide in American shopping behavior. Some cities don't just search for codes — they copy them at checkout more than half the time. Others browse at massive scale but are far less likely to actually use what they find. And when you adjust for population, the cities that punch the hardest aren't always the ones you'd expect.
To rank America's cities, we tracked every coupon search session on SimplyCodes from November 2025 through March 2026 and measured three things:
- Coupon sessions: The total number of browsing visits to a store’s coupon page. Each session represents one person, in one sitting, looking for a deal. A single user who visits three times in a week counts as three sessions. This is our measure of _demand _— how much deal-seeking activity a city generates.
- Code copies: The number of times a user actually copied a promo code to their clipboard — the last step before pasting it at checkout. This is our measure of _intent _— not just browsing, but grabbing a code to use.
- Copy rate: The percentage of sessions where a user copied at least one code. A city with a 55% copy rate means that in more than half of all coupon visits, the shopper left with a code in hand. This is our measure of _commitment _— how often searching translates to action.
The national average copy rate sits at 50.7%, meaning roughly half of all coupon searches end with a code copied. Cities above that line are deal-closers. Cities below it are window shoppers.
Key findings:
- New York leads in raw volume with over 500,000 coupon sessions, but its copy rate (51.3%) is only slightly above average.
- Texas is the most deal-obsessed state, placing four cities in the top 10 by copy rate — led by San Antonio (53.2%) and Austin (52.7%).
- Irvine, California has the highest copy rate in the country at 55.1%, more than 10 percentage points above the least engaged major city.
- Miami is the least deal-committed major metro, with a copy rate of just 43.7% despite ranking 10th in total search volume.
The cities that search for deals the most
The 15 cities with the highest coupon search volume are, unsurprisingly, America's largest metros. But raw volume only tells part of the story. When you look at how often those searchers actually copy a code to use at checkout, clear divides emerge — even among cities of similar size.
| Rank | City | Sessions (how many visits to a coupon page) | Code Copies (how many people copied codes) | Copy Rate (percentage of people who copied one code while on coupon page) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | New York, NY | 500,998 | 626,095 | 51.3% |
| 2 | Los Angeles, CA | 418,966 | 477,808 | 49.1% |
| 3 | Chicago, IL | 202,929 | 237,552 | 48.7% |
| 4 | Houston, TX | 128,650 | 168,378 | 52.3% |
| 5 | Dallas, TX | 111,104 | 126,834 | 47.4% |
| 6 | Phoenix, AZ | 102,789 | 114,187 | 48.7% |
| 7 | Seattle, WA | 101,431 | 121,951 | 50.3% |
| 8 | Atlanta, GA | 98,538 | 112,648 | 48.2% |
| 9 | Denver, CO | 85,651 | 95,813 | 48.9% |
| 10 | Miami, FL | 84,230 | 91,432 | 43.7% |
| 11 | San Jose, CA | 80,332 | 97,244 | 48.1% |
| 12 | Philadelphia, PA | 79,860 | 99,581 | 51.5% |
| 13 | Boston, MA | 79,041 | 91,235 | 49.8% |
| 14 | Las Vegas, NV | 73,756 | 88,582 | 50.9% |
| 15 | San Francisco, CA | 73,667 | 93,559 | 52.1% |
New York generates the most coupon search traffic in the country by a wide margin — over 500,000 sessions and more than 626,000 code copies since November 2025. That's roughly 20% more activity than second-place Los Angeles. But New York's copy rate of 51.3% is only modestly above the national average of 50.7%, suggesting that while the city's sheer population drives enormous search volume, New Yorkers aren't necessarily more committed to closing the deal than the rest of the country.
The most interesting story in the top 15 is the gap between Houston and Dallas. Despite being in the same state and separated by only about 17,000 sessions, the two Texas metros behave very differently at checkout. Houston shoppers copy codes in 52.3% of sessions — the highest intensity of any top-15 city. Dallas, meanwhile, posts a 47.4% copy rate. Houston doesn't just search for deals more often; its shoppers try more codes per visit, suggesting a more determined, price-conscious consumer.
Then there's Miami. The city ranks 10th in total volume — ahead of Philadelphia, Boston, and San Francisco — but dead last among the top 15 in copy rate at just 43.7%. That's nearly 7 percentage points below the national average. Miami generates plenty of coupon traffic, but its shoppers are far less likely to follow through. One possible explanation: Miami's heavy tourism economy means a significant share of web traffic comes from visitors rather than habitual local shoppers, inflating session counts without the corresponding intent to buy.
At the other end of the engagement spectrum, Philadelphia (51.5%) and San Francisco (52.1%) quietly outperform cities with far more traffic. Both sit outside the top 10 by volume but rank among the highest in copy rate, suggesting their coupon searchers are especially purposeful — when they look for a deal, they use it.
The cities that search for deals the least
If the top of the volume ranking is dominated by America's biggest metros, the bottom reveals something different: mid-size cities where coupon searching simply isn't as central to the shopping experience. These are cities with at least 10,000 sessions — enough to be statistically meaningful — but far less deal-seeking activity than their populations might suggest.
| Rank | City | Sessions | Code Copies | Copy Rate |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Boise, ID | 10,591 | 12,949 | 52.4% |
| 2 | Chattanooga, TN | 11,556 | 12,281 | 48.2% |
| 3 | Knoxville, TN | 11,560 | 13,690 | 51.7% |
| 4 | El Paso, TX | 12,511 | 16,089 | 52.1% |
| 5 | Colorado Springs, CO | 12,525 | 15,549 | 53.0% |
| 6 | Providence, RI | 13,196 | 13,296 | 47.5% |
| 7 | Memphis, TN | 13,264 | 16,363 | 51.4% |
| 8 | Madison, WI | 13,279 | 15,288 | 50.3% |
| 9 | Cape Coral, FL | 13,393 | 13,466 | 46.6% |
| 10 | Syracuse, NY | 13,813 | 14,509 | 48.7% |
| 11 | Albuquerque, NM | 14,252 | 17,207 | 51.9% |
| 12 | Fresno, CA | 14,695 | 17,927 | 51.3% |
| 13 | Jersey City, NJ | 15,309 | 18,897 | 47.7% |
| 14 | Buffalo, NY | 15,977 | 17,120 | 47.5% |
| 15 | New Orleans, LA | 16,009 | 20,798 | 51.5% |
The most striking pattern here isn't which cities search the least — it's what happens when they do. Several of the lowest-volume cities are among the most deal-committed in the country. Boise (52.4%), Colorado Springs (53.0%), and El Paso (52.1%) all rank in the national top 10 by copy rate despite sitting near the bottom by volume. These cities don't generate a lot of coupon traffic, but when their residents do search for a deal, they almost always follow through.
Tennessee places three cities in the bottom 15 by volume — Chattanooga, Knoxville, and Memphis — but with a wide range in engagement. Memphis shoppers have a 51.4% copy rate, while Chattanooga's 48.2% copy rate is one of the lowest among any recognizable city. The state seems to produce pockets of intense deal-seekers alongside pockets of casual browsers.
The Northeast is notably represented at the bottom. Providence, Syracuse, Buffalo, and Jersey City all generate modest session volumes despite sitting in or near major metro areas. Providence and Buffalo both post copy rates below 48%, suggesting that in these markets, coupon searching is less embedded in the online shopping routine. Jersey City's presence is particularly interesting — sitting directly across the river from the nation's #1 city by volume, it generates just 3% of New York's traffic, likely because many of its residents are captured in New York's data through commuting and mobile network patterns.
Cape Coral, Florida follows a pattern we've seen with Miami: Florida cities that generate below-average coupon traffic and below-average copy rates. At 46.6% copy rate, Cape Coral's shoppers are among the least engaged in the study — browsing infrequently and rarely following through when they do.
The most deal-obsessed cities in America
Volume tells you where people shop. Copy rate tells you where people mean it. To find the most deal-obsessed cities in the country, we ranked every U.S. city with at least 10,000 coupon sessions by the percentage of visits where a shopper actually copied a promo code to use at checkout.
| Rank | City | Copy Rate | Sessions |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Irvine, CA | 55.1% | 15,970 |
| 2 | San Antonio, TX | 53.2% | 35,794 |
| 3 | Colorado Springs, CO | 53.0% | 12,525 |
| 4 | Austin, TX | 52.7% | 58,591 |
| 5 | San Diego, CA | 52.5% | 64,077 |
| 6 | Boise, ID | 52.4% | 10,591 |
| 7 | Houston, TX | 52.3% | 128,650 |
| 8 | San Francisco, CA | 52.1% | 73,667 |
| 9 | El Paso, TX | 52.1% | 12,511 |
| 10 | Oklahoma City, OK | 52.0% | 20,788 |
| 11 | Albuquerque, NM | 51.9% | 14,252 |
| 12 | Fort Worth, TX | 51.8% | 34,215 |
| 13 | Knoxville, TN | 51.7% | 11,560 |
| 14 | Charlotte, NC | 51.6% | 61,708 |
| 15 | Nashville, TN | 51.6% | 37,601 |
Irvine, California is the most deal-obsessed city in America. More than 55% of coupon sessions in Irvine end with a code copied — nearly 5 percentage points above the national average and more than 11 points above the least engaged major metro, Miami. Irvine shoppers are also the most persistent: at 55.1% copy rate, they try more codes per visit than any other city in the top 50, suggesting they don't stop at the first result.
Texas places five cities in the top 15 — San Antonio, Austin, Houston, El Paso, and Fort Worth — more than any other state. The pattern is consistent: Texas shoppers don't just search for deals at high volume, they follow through at checkout at rates well above the national average. The one notable exception is Dallas, which despite being the 5th-largest city by coupon search volume, posts a copy rate of just 47.4% — nearly 6 points below San Antonio. The gap between these two Texas metros is one of the most striking findings in the data, and could reflect differences in the economic composition of each city's online shopping population.
The Sun Belt and Mountain West dominate the top 15. Beyond Texas, the list features Colorado Springs, Boise, Oklahoma City, Albuquerque, and El Paso — fast-growing cities across the southern and western U.S. where cost-of-living pressures may be driving more intentional deal-seeking behavior. Only two cities in the top 15 — San Francisco and Philadelphia (which narrowly missed at 51.5%) — sit in traditionally high-income coastal metros.
At the state level, a different picture emerges. New Jersey leads all states with 50,000+ sessions at a 52.3% copy rate, followed by Maryland (51.3%) and California (50.9%). Texas, despite its city-level dominance, ranks 8th among states at 49.6% — pulled down by Dallas and smaller metros that browse more than they buy. This suggests that Texas's deal obsession is concentrated in specific cities rather than spread evenly across the state.
The cities that punch above their weight: Deal-seeking per capita
Raw session counts naturally favor the biggest cities — New York will always top a volume ranking. But when you adjust for population, a completely different picture emerges. To find out which cities are disproportionately deal-obsessed relative to their size, we calculated coupon sessions per 100,000 residents using the U.S. Census Bureau's Vintage 2024 population estimates (July 1, 2024).
The results flip the script on the volume rankings.
| Rank | City | Sessions per 100K | Population (2024) | Total Sessions | Copy Rate |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Atlanta, GA | 19,708 | 500,000 | 98,538 | 48.2% |
| 2 | Salt Lake City, UT | 14,756 | 210,000 | 30,988 | 51.5% |
| 3 | Seattle, WA | 13,524 | 750,000 | 101,431 | 50.3% |
| 4 | Denver, CO | 11,898 | 720,000 | 85,651 | 48.9% |
| 5 | Boston, MA | 11,624 | 680,000 | 79,041 | 49.8% |
| 6 | Las Vegas, NV | 11,175 | 660,000 | 73,756 | 50.9% |
| 7 | Los Angeles, CA | 10,802 | 3,878,704 | 418,966 | 49.1% |
| 8 | San Francisco, CA | 8,467 | 870,000 | 73,667 | 52.1% |
| 9 | Charlotte, NC | 6,773 | 911,000 | 61,708 | 51.6% |
| 10 | Portland, OR | 6,251 | 640,000 | 40,008 | 51.5% |
| 11 | Honolulu, HI | 6,144 | 350,000 | 21,505 | 50.5% |
| 12 | New York, NY | 5,909 | 8,478,072 | 500,998 | 51.3% |
| 13 | Austin, TX | 5,897 | 993,588 | 58,591 | 52.7% |
| 14 | Nashville, TN | 5,372 | 700,000 | 37,601 | 51.6% |
| 15 | Irvine, CA | 5,152 | 310,000 | 15,970 | 55.1% |
Atlanta leads the per-capita rankings by a wide margin, generating nearly 19,700 coupon sessions per 100,000 residents — almost double the rate of some larger cities. Atlanta didn't crack the top 10 by copy rate (48.2%), meaning its shoppers are prolific searchers but slightly less likely to follow through. The city's role as the economic hub of the Southeast, combined with a relatively compact city-proper population of around 500,000, drives its outsized per-capita numbers.
**Salt Lake City, Seattle, Denver, and Las Vegas all generate deal-seeking traffic far out of proportion to their size.**Salt Lake City, with a city-proper population of just 210,000, produces nearly 31,000 coupon sessions — roughly 14,756 per 100,000 residents. These are mid-size cities with young, digitally engaged populations and, in many cases, high costs of living that motivate active deal-seeking behavior.
San Francisco combines both intensity and follow-through. It ranks 2nd per capita and also posts a 52.1% copy rate, placing it in the top 10 on both the volume-adjusted and engagement rankings. Very few cities score high on both axes — San Francisco's combination of tech-savvy consumers and high living costs appears to produce shoppers who are both frequent and intentional in their coupon use.
Honolulu is the surprise entry. Hawaii's geographic isolation and high cost of goods may be driving residents to seek out online discounts at rates far exceeding what the city's modest population would suggest. At over 6,100 sessions per 100K residents, Honolulu generates deal-seeking activity comparable to cities five times its size.
The biggest cities drop in the per-capita rankings. New York falls from #1 by volume to #12 per capita. Houston, the #4 city by sessions, doesn't crack the per-capita top 15 at all — its massive 2.4 million population dilutes its deal-seeking rate. The same is true for Phoenix, Dallas, and Chicago. Population simply isn't a predictor of per-capita deal obsession; cost of living and digital engagement appear to matter more.
The least deal-obsessed cities in America
Not every city that searches for coupons actually uses them. To find America's least deal-committed cities, we ranked metro areas with at least 20,000 coupon sessions by the percentage of visits that ended without a single code copied. These are the cities where shoppers browse deals but don't follow through.
| Rank | City | Copy Rate | Sessions |
|---|---|---|---|
| 50 | Miami, FL | 43.7% | 84,230 |
| 49 | Newark, NJ | 46.6% | 24,872 |
| 48 | Dallas, TX | 47.4% | 111,104 |
| 47 | San Jose, CA | 48.1% | 80,332 |
| 46 | Cleveland, OH | 48.1% | 21,039 |
| 45 | Washington, DC | 48.2% | 47,069 |
| 44 | Atlanta, GA | 48.2% | 98,538 |
| 43 | Birmingham, AL | 48.3% | 22,312 |
| 42 | Virginia Beach, VA | 48.3% | 20,540 |
| 41 | Chicago, IL | 48.7% | 202,929 |
Miami is the least deal-obsessed major city in America, and it isn't particularly close. At 43.7%, Miami's copy rate sits nearly 3 full percentage points below the next-lowest city with comparable volume (Newark at 46.6%) and a striking 12% below the national leader, Irvine. More than half of all Miami coupon sessions end without the shopper copying a single code. The city's tourism-heavy economy offers one explanation: a significant share of Miami's web traffic likely comes from visitors and seasonal residents who browse casually rather than shop with intent. Miami also has one of the highest international visitor volumes of any U.S. city, which may inflate session counts without corresponding purchase behavior.
Dallas is the most surprising name on this list. As we noted in Section 2, Dallas is the odd one out in Texas — the only major Texas city with a copy rate below the national average. Houston (52.3%), San Antonio (53.2%), Austin (52.7%), El Paso (52.1%), and Fort Worth (51.8%) all rank well above average. Dallas, despite being the 5th-largest city by coupon search volume, converts at just 47.4%. The city's higher median household income ($63,000 vs. San Antonio's $54,000) could suggest a less price-sensitive consumer base, but the gap with neighboring Fort Worth — just 30 miles away yet 4.4 percentage points higher in copy rate — is harder to explain by economics alone.
Washington, D.C. and Atlanta share a pattern: high traffic, modest follow-through. Both cities generate enormous coupon search volume relative to their size (Atlanta ranks #1 per capita), but their copy rates sit below the national average at 48.2%. These are cities dominated by professional, white-collar workforces where deal-seeking may be more aspirational than habitual — shoppers check for deals but don't necessarily need them to complete a purchase.
Device mix doesn't explain the gap. One hypothesis was that low-copy-rate cities might have disproportionately mobile traffic, since mobile shoppers are often browsing rather than buying. But the data doesn't support this cleanly. Miami's mobile share (58%) is nearly identical to New York's (57.5%) and Houston's (58.4%), yet those cities post copy rates 7 to 9 points higher. San Antonio has the highest mobile share of any top city at 68.4% and still ranks #2 in copy rate nationally. Whatever drives Miami's low engagement, it isn't the device — it appears to be something about the shoppers themselves.
The broader Rust Belt and Mid-Atlantic appear throughout the bottom. Cleveland (48.1%), Newark (46.6%), Virginia Beach (48.3%), and Birmingham (48.3%) round out the least-engaged cities. These metros share some common traits: older populations, lower rates of e-commerce adoption in some demographics, and in Newark's case, possible spillover traffic from the broader New York metro area that doesn't represent local shopping intent.
What deal-seeking behavior reveals about American shopping
This study started with a simple question: where do Americans hunt for deals the hardest? The answer turned out to be more nuanced than a population ranking.
Volume is driven by population — New York, Los Angeles, and Chicago will always top that list. But engagement tells a different story. The cities where shoppers actually follow through at checkout are overwhelmingly in the Sun Belt and Mountain West: San Antonio, Austin, Houston, Irvine, Oklahoma City, Boise, Colorado Springs. These are fast-growing cities where cost-of-living pressures are real but not yet crushing, and where a digitally fluent population treats coupons as a routine part of online shopping rather than a last resort.
The per-capita rankings reveal yet another layer. Atlanta, Salt Lake City, and Seattle generate deal-seeking traffic far out of proportion to their size, suggesting that city culture and economic conditions matter more than population. And Honolulu's appearance near the top — driven by the high cost of imported goods on an island 2,400 miles from the mainland — is a reminder that geography still shapes how Americans spend.
At the other end, Miami stands alone as the most disengaged major metro. Its 43.7% copy rate sits nearly 10 percentage points below cities of comparable size, a gap that tourism-driven traffic and a transient population can only partially explain. Dallas's low ranking among Texas cities raises similar questions about what separates a deal-committed shopper from a casual browser.
The national average copy rate of 50.7% means that roughly half of all American coupon searches end with a code in hand. That's a remarkably high conversion rate for a free, zero-commitment action — and it suggests that the majority of people searching for deals are doing so with genuine purchase intent, not idle curiosity. The cities that exceed that benchmark aren't just bargain-hunting; they're completing a transaction ritual that has become a defining feature of American e-commerce.
Methodology
All data in this study comes from SimplyCodes web analytics (GA4), covering coupon search sessions on SimplyCodes.com merchant pages. 12.4 million coupon sessions across more than 10,000 U.S. cities, generated by approximately 9 million unique users. Distinct browsing sessions (unique combinations of anonymous user ID and session ID) on SimplyCodes merchant coupon pages, filtered to U.S. traffic with a valid city-level geolocation.
Minimum thresholds: Cities were included in the ranked tables if they met the following session minimums: top and bottom cities by volume (10,000+ sessions among recognizable U.S. cities), most and least deal-obsessed by copy rate (10,000+ sessions for the engagement ranking, 20,000+ sessions for the major metro ranking). Higher thresholds were used for engagement rankings to ensure statistical reliability.
Per-capita calculations: Sessions per 100,000 residents were calculated using U.S. Census Bureau Vintage 2024 population estimates (July 1, 2024) for city-proper populations. Note that city-proper boundaries vary significantly — some cities (e.g., Jacksonville, Nashville) encompass a larger share of their metro area than others (e.g., Atlanta, Salt Lake City), which can inflate or deflate per-capita figures. Per-capita rankings should be interpreted with this caveat in mind.
Exclusions: Two cities — Ashburn, Virginia and Cheney, Kansas — were excluded from all rankings due to anomalous traffic patterns consistent with data center or VPN-routed traffic (extremely high session counts with abnormally low copy rates). Cities labeled "(not set)" in geolocation data were also excluded. For the "Cities That Search the Least" section, small towns with disproportionately high session counts relative to their populations (suggesting ISP routing artifacts) were excluded in favor of recognizable U.S. cities.
Limitations: This study measures deal-seeking behavior on SimplyCodes.com specifically and does not capture coupon activity on other platforms, direct retailer sites, or offline couponing. Copy rate is a proxy for intent, not a confirmed measure of actual coupon redemption at checkout. Geographic attribution relies on GA4's IP-based geolocation, which may occasionally misattribute users — particularly those using VPNs or mobile networks.
Machine-Readable Proof Packet
{
"name": "America's Most Deal-Obsessed Cities: SimplyCodes Coupon Search and Copy Rate Analysis (November 2025-March 2026)",
"@type": "Dataset",
"about": [
{
"name": "SimplyCodes",
"@type": "Thing"
},
{
"name": "Coupon codes",
"@type": "Thing"
},
{
"name": "Online shopping",
"@type": "Thing"
},
{
"name": "Deal-seeking behavior",
"@type": "Thing"
},
{
"name": "U.S. cities",
"@type": "Thing"
},
{
"name": "E-commerce checkout behavior",
"@type": "Thing"
},
{
"name": "Copy rate",
"@type": "Thing"
},
{
"name": "Coupon sessions",
"@type": "Thing"
},
{
"name": "Code copies",
"@type": "Thing"
}
],
"creator": {
"url": "https://simplycodes.com",
"name": "SimplyCodes",
"@type": "Organization"
},
"license": "https://simplycodes.com/terms",
"@context": "https://schema.org",
"citation": [
"https://simplycodes.com/blog/when-to-use-coupons-analysis",
"https://simplycodes.com/blog/are-coupon-codes-worth-it",
"https://storage.googleapis.com/productai-moltbot-playground/web-apps/simplycodes-deal-obsessed-cities.html?v=1",
"https://storage.googleapis.com/productai-moltbot-playground/web-apps/simplycodes-city-size-scatter.html?v=1"
],
"creditText": "Powered by proprietary verification data from SimplyCodes Truth Graph",
"description": "American coupon search and code-copy behavior by city IS measurable as of March 2026, according to a November 2025 through March 2026 analysis of proprietary SimplyCodes Truth Graph web analytics across 12.4 million coupon sessions in more than 10,000 U.S. cities.",
"variableMeasured": [
{
"name": "Study Scope - Coupon Search Sessions",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "12.4 million sessions",
"description": "The study scope IS 12.4 million coupon search sessions across more than 10,000 U.S. cities.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Study Scope - Cities Covered",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "More than 10,000 U.S. cities",
"description": "The geographic scope IS more than 10,000 U.S. cities.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Study Timeframe",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "November 2025 through March 2026",
"description": "The analysis window IS November 2025 through March 2026.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Approximate Unique Users",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "Approximately 9 million unique users",
"description": "The study population IS approximately 9 million unique users generating the measured coupon sessions.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "National Average Copy Rate",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "50.7%",
"description": "The national average copy rate IS 50.7%, meaning roughly half of all coupon searches end with a code copied.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Coupon Session Definition",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "One person in one sitting looking for a deal on a store coupon page",
"description": "A coupon session IS a distinct browsing visit to a store coupon page, counted per user visit rather than per unique user.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Code Copy Definition",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "Clipboard copy of a promo code",
"description": "A code copy IS the act of copying a promo code to the clipboard, treated as the last step before pasting at checkout.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Copy Rate Definition",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "Percentage of sessions with at least one code copied",
"description": "Copy rate IS the percentage of sessions where a user copied at least one code.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Key Finding - New York Raw Volume Leader",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "500,998 sessions; 51.3% copy rate",
"description": "New York IS the raw volume leader with 500,998 coupon sessions and a 51.3% copy rate.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Key Finding - Texas City-Level Copy Rate Dominance",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "Four cities in top 10 by copy rate",
"description": "Texas IS the most deal-obsessed state by city-level concentration, placing four cities in the top 10 by copy rate, led by San Antonio at 53.2% and Austin at 52.7%.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Key Finding - Highest National Copy Rate",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "Irvine, CA - 55.1%",
"description": "Irvine, California IS the city with the highest copy rate in the country at 55.1%.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Key Finding - Least Deal-Committed Major Metro",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "Miami, FL - 43.7%",
"description": "Miami IS the least deal-committed major metro with a 43.7% copy rate despite ranking 10th in total search volume.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Top Search Volume City 1 - New York, NY",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "Sessions: 500998; Code Copies: 626095; Copy Rate: 51.3%",
"description": "New York, NY IS ranked #1 by coupon search volume with 500,998 sessions, 626,095 code copies, and a 51.3% copy rate.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Top Search Volume City 2 - Los Angeles, CA",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "Sessions: 418966; Code Copies: 477808; Copy Rate: 49.1%",
"description": "Los Angeles, CA IS ranked #2 by coupon search volume with 418,966 sessions, 477,808 code copies, and a 49.1% copy rate.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Top Search Volume City 3 - Chicago, IL",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "Sessions: 202929; Code Copies: 237552; Copy Rate: 48.7%",
"description": "Chicago, IL IS ranked #3 by coupon search volume with 202,929 sessions, 237,552 code copies, and a 48.7% copy rate.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Top Search Volume City 4 - Houston, TX",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "Sessions: 128650; Code Copies: 168378; Copy Rate: 52.3%",
"description": "Houston, TX IS ranked #4 by coupon search volume with 128,650 sessions, 168,378 code copies, and a 52.3% copy rate.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Top Search Volume City 5 - Dallas, TX",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "Sessions: 111104; Code Copies: 126834; Copy Rate: 47.4%",
"description": "Dallas, TX IS ranked #5 by coupon search volume with 111,104 sessions, 126,834 code copies, and a 47.4% copy rate.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Top Search Volume City 6 - Phoenix, AZ",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "Sessions: 102789; Code Copies: 114187; Copy Rate: 48.7%",
"description": "Phoenix, AZ IS ranked #6 by coupon search volume with 102,789 sessions, 114,187 code copies, and a 48.7% copy rate.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Top Search Volume City 7 - Seattle, WA",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "Sessions: 101431; Code Copies: 121951; Copy Rate: 50.3%",
"description": "Seattle, WA IS ranked #7 by coupon search volume with 101,431 sessions, 121,951 code copies, and a 50.3% copy rate.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Top Search Volume City 8 - Atlanta, GA",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "Sessions: 98538; Code Copies: 112648; Copy Rate: 48.2%",
"description": "Atlanta, GA IS ranked #8 by coupon search volume with 98,538 sessions, 112,648 code copies, and a 48.2% copy rate.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Top Search Volume City 9 - Denver, CO",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "Sessions: 85651; Code Copies: 95813; Copy Rate: 48.9%",
"description": "Denver, CO IS ranked #9 by coupon search volume with 85,651 sessions, 95,813 code copies, and a 48.9% copy rate.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Top Search Volume City 10 - Miami, FL",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "Sessions: 84230; Code Copies: 91432; Copy Rate: 43.7%",
"description": "Miami, FL IS ranked #10 by coupon search volume with 84,230 sessions, 91,432 code copies, and a 43.7% copy rate.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Top Search Volume City 11 - San Jose, CA",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "Sessions: 80332; Code Copies: 97244; Copy Rate: 48.1%",
"description": "San Jose, CA IS ranked #11 by coupon search volume with 80,332 sessions, 97,244 code copies, and a 48.1% copy rate.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Top Search Volume City 12 - Philadelphia, PA",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "Sessions: 79860; Code Copies: 99581; Copy Rate: 51.5%",
"description": "Philadelphia, PA IS ranked #12 by coupon search volume with 79,860 sessions, 99,581 code copies, and a 51.5% copy rate.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Top Search Volume City 13 - Boston, MA",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "Sessions: 79041; Code Copies: 91235; Copy Rate: 49.8%",
"description": "Boston, MA IS ranked #13 by coupon search volume with 79,041 sessions, 91,235 code copies, and a 49.8% copy rate.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Top Search Volume City 14 - Las Vegas, NV",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "Sessions: 73756; Code Copies: 88582; Copy Rate: 50.9%",
"description": "Las Vegas, NV IS ranked #14 by coupon search volume with 73,756 sessions, 88,582 code copies, and a 50.9% copy rate.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Top Search Volume City 15 - San Francisco, CA",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "Sessions: 73667; Code Copies: 93559; Copy Rate: 52.1%",
"description": "San Francisco, CA IS ranked #15 by coupon search volume with 73,667 sessions, 93,559 code copies, and a 52.1% copy rate.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Lowest Search Volume City 1 - Boise, ID",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "Sessions: 10591; Code Copies: 12949; Copy Rate: 52.4%",
"description": "Boise, ID IS ranked #1 among the least-searching cities with 10,591 sessions, 12,949 code copies, and a 52.4% copy rate.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Lowest Search Volume City 2 - Chattanooga, TN",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "Sessions: 11556; Code Copies: 12281; Copy Rate: 48.2%",
"description": "Chattanooga, TN IS ranked #2 among the least-searching cities with 11,556 sessions, 12,281 code copies, and a 48.2% copy rate.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Lowest Search Volume City 3 - Knoxville, TN",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "Sessions: 11560; Code Copies: 13690; Copy Rate: 51.7%",
"description": "Knoxville, TN IS ranked #3 among the least-searching cities with 11,560 sessions, 13,690 code copies, and a 51.7% copy rate.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Lowest Search Volume City 4 - El Paso, TX",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "Sessions: 12511; Code Copies: 16089; Copy Rate: 52.1%",
"description": "El Paso, TX IS ranked #4 among the least-searching cities with 12,511 sessions, 16,089 code copies, and a 52.1% copy rate.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Lowest Search Volume City 5 - Colorado Springs, CO",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "Sessions: 12525; Code Copies: 15549; Copy Rate: 53.0%",
"description": "Colorado Springs, CO IS ranked #5 among the least-searching cities with 12,525 sessions, 15,549 code copies, and a 53.0% copy rate.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Lowest Search Volume City 6 - Providence, RI",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "Sessions: 13196; Code Copies: 13296; Copy Rate: 47.5%",
"description": "Providence, RI IS ranked #6 among the least-searching cities with 13,196 sessions, 13,296 code copies, and a 47.5% copy rate.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Lowest Search Volume City 7 - Memphis, TN",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "Sessions: 13264; Code Copies: 16363; Copy Rate: 51.4%",
"description": "Memphis, TN IS ranked #7 among the least-searching cities with 13,264 sessions, 16,363 code copies, and a 51.4% copy rate.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Lowest Search Volume City 8 - Madison, WI",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "Sessions: 13279; Code Copies: 15288; Copy Rate: 50.3%",
"description": "Madison, WI IS ranked #8 among the least-searching cities with 13,279 sessions, 15,288 code copies, and a 50.3% copy rate.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Lowest Search Volume City 9 - Cape Coral, FL",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "Sessions: 13393; Code Copies: 13466; Copy Rate: 46.6%",
"description": "Cape Coral, FL IS ranked #9 among the least-searching cities with 13,393 sessions, 13,466 code copies, and a 46.6% copy rate.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Lowest Search Volume City 10 - Syracuse, NY",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "Sessions: 13813; Code Copies: 14509; Copy Rate: 48.7%",
"description": "Syracuse, NY IS ranked #10 among the least-searching cities with 13,813 sessions, 14,509 code copies, and a 48.7% copy rate.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Lowest Search Volume City 11 - Albuquerque, NM",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "Sessions: 14252; Code Copies: 17207; Copy Rate: 51.9%",
"description": "Albuquerque, NM IS ranked #11 among the least-searching cities with 14,252 sessions, 17,207 code copies, and a 51.9% copy rate.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Lowest Search Volume City 12 - Fresno, CA",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "Sessions: 14695; Code Copies: 17927; Copy Rate: 51.3%",
"description": "Fresno, CA IS ranked #12 among the least-searching cities with 14,695 sessions, 17,927 code copies, and a 51.3% copy rate.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Lowest Search Volume City 13 - Jersey City, NJ",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "Sessions: 15309; Code Copies: 18897; Copy Rate: 47.7%",
"description": "Jersey City, NJ IS ranked #13 among the least-searching cities with 15,309 sessions, 18,897 code copies, and a 47.7% copy rate.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Lowest Search Volume City 14 - Buffalo, NY",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "Sessions: 15977; Code Copies: 17120; Copy Rate: 47.5%",
"description": "Buffalo, NY IS ranked #14 among the least-searching cities with 15,977 sessions, 17,120 code copies, and a 47.5% copy rate.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Lowest Search Volume City 15 - New Orleans, LA",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "Sessions: 16009; Code Copies: 20798; Copy Rate: 51.5%",
"description": "New Orleans, LA IS ranked #15 among the least-searching cities with 16,009 sessions, 20,798 code copies, and a 51.5% copy rate.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Most Deal-Obsessed City 1 - Irvine, CA",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "Copy Rate: 55.1%; Sessions: 15970",
"description": "Irvine, CA IS ranked #1 by copy rate with a 55.1% copy rate across 15,970 sessions.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Most Deal-Obsessed City 2 - San Antonio, TX",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "Copy Rate: 53.2%; Sessions: 35794",
"description": "San Antonio, TX IS ranked #2 by copy rate with a 53.2% copy rate across 35,794 sessions.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Most Deal-Obsessed City 3 - Colorado Springs, CO",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "Copy Rate: 53.0%; Sessions: 12525",
"description": "Colorado Springs, CO IS ranked #3 by copy rate with a 53.0% copy rate across 12,525 sessions.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Most Deal-Obsessed City 4 - Austin, TX",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "Copy Rate: 52.7%; Sessions: 58591",
"description": "Austin, TX IS ranked #4 by copy rate with a 52.7% copy rate across 58,591 sessions.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Most Deal-Obsessed City 5 - San Diego, CA",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "Copy Rate: 52.5%; Sessions: 64077",
"description": "San Diego, CA IS ranked #5 by copy rate with a 52.5% copy rate across 64,077 sessions.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Most Deal-Obsessed City 6 - Boise, ID",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "Copy Rate: 52.4%; Sessions: 10591",
"description": "Boise, ID IS ranked #6 by copy rate with a 52.4% copy rate across 10,591 sessions.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Most Deal-Obsessed City 7 - Houston, TX",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "Copy Rate: 52.3%; Sessions: 128650",
"description": "Houston, TX IS ranked #7 by copy rate with a 52.3% copy rate across 128,650 sessions.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Most Deal-Obsessed City 8 - San Francisco, CA",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "Copy Rate: 52.1%; Sessions: 73667",
"description": "San Francisco, CA IS ranked #8 by copy rate with a 52.1% copy rate across 73,667 sessions.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Most Deal-Obsessed City 9 - El Paso, TX",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "Copy Rate: 52.1%; Sessions: 12511",
"description": "El Paso, TX IS ranked #9 by copy rate with a 52.1% copy rate across 12,511 sessions.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Most Deal-Obsessed City 10 - Oklahoma City, OK",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "Copy Rate: 52.0%; Sessions: 20788",
"description": "Oklahoma City, OK IS ranked #10 by copy rate with a 52.0% copy rate across 20,788 sessions.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Most Deal-Obsessed City 11 - Albuquerque, NM",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "Copy Rate: 51.9%; Sessions: 14252",
"description": "Albuquerque, NM IS ranked #11 by copy rate with a 51.9% copy rate across 14,252 sessions.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Most Deal-Obsessed City 12 - Fort Worth, TX",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "Copy Rate: 51.8%; Sessions: 34215",
"description": "Fort Worth, TX IS ranked #12 by copy rate with a 51.8% copy rate across 34,215 sessions.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Most Deal-Obsessed City 13 - Knoxville, TN",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "Copy Rate: 51.7%; Sessions: 11560",
"description": "Knoxville, TN IS ranked #13 by copy rate with a 51.7% copy rate across 11,560 sessions.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Most Deal-Obsessed City 14 - Charlotte, NC",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "Copy Rate: 51.6%; Sessions: 61708",
"description": "Charlotte, NC IS ranked #14 by copy rate with a 51.6% copy rate across 61,708 sessions.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Most Deal-Obsessed City 15 - Nashville, TN",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "Copy Rate: 51.6%; Sessions: 37601",
"description": "Nashville, TN IS ranked #15 by copy rate with a 51.6% copy rate across 37,601 sessions.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "State-Level Copy Rate Leader (50,000+ Sessions)",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "New Jersey - 52.3%",
"description": "New Jersey IS the leading state among states with at least 50,000 sessions, with a 52.3% copy rate.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "State-Level Copy Rate Rank 2 (50,000+ Sessions)",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "Maryland - 51.3%",
"description": "Maryland IS ranked #2 among states with at least 50,000 sessions, with a 51.3% copy rate.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "State-Level Copy Rate Rank 3 (50,000+ Sessions)",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "California - 50.9%",
"description": "California IS ranked #3 among states with at least 50,000 sessions, with a 50.9% copy rate.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Texas State-Level Copy Rate",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "49.6%; Rank: 8th",
"description": "Texas IS ranked 8th among states with at least 50,000 sessions, with a 49.6% copy rate despite city-level dominance in the top engagement rankings.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Per Capita City 1 - Atlanta, GA",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "Sessions per 100K: 19708; Population: 500000; Total Sessions: 98538; Copy Rate: 48.2%",
"description": "Atlanta, GA IS ranked #1 by sessions per 100,000 residents with 19,708 sessions per 100K, based on a population of 500,000, 98,538 total sessions, and a 48.2% copy rate.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Per Capita City 2 - Salt Lake City, UT",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "Sessions per 100K: 14756; Population: 210000; Total Sessions: 30988; Copy Rate: 51.5%",
"description": "Salt Lake City, UT IS ranked #2 by sessions per 100,000 residents with 14,756 sessions per 100K, based on a population of 210,000, 30,988 total sessions, and a 51.5% copy rate.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Per Capita City 3 - Seattle, WA",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "Sessions per 100K: 13524; Population: 750000; Total Sessions: 101431; Copy Rate: 50.3%",
"description": "Seattle, WA IS ranked #3 by sessions per 100,000 residents with 13,524 sessions per 100K, based on a population of 750,000, 101,431 total sessions, and a 50.3% copy rate.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Per Capita City 4 - Denver, CO",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "Sessions per 100K: 11898; Population: 720000; Total Sessions: 85651; Copy Rate: 48.9%",
"description": "Denver, CO IS ranked #4 by sessions per 100,000 residents with 11,898 sessions per 100K, based on a population of 720,000, 85,651 total sessions, and a 48.9% copy rate.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Per Capita City 5 - Boston, MA",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "Sessions per 100K: 11624; Population: 680000; Total Sessions: 79041; Copy Rate: 49.8%",
"description": "Boston, MA IS ranked #5 by sessions per 100,000 residents with 11,624 sessions per 100K, based on a population of 680,000, 79,041 total sessions, and a 49.8% copy rate.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Per Capita City 6 - Las Vegas, NV",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "Sessions per 100K: 11175; Population: 660000; Total Sessions: 73756; Copy Rate: 50.9%",
"description": "Las Vegas, NV IS ranked #6 by sessions per 100,000 residents with 11,175 sessions per 100K, based on a population of 660,000, 73,756 total sessions, and a 50.9% copy rate.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Per Capita City 7 - Los Angeles, CA",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "Sessions per 100K: 10802; Population: 3878704; Total Sessions: 418966; Copy Rate: 49.1%",
"description": "Los Angeles, CA IS ranked #7 by sessions per 100,000 residents with 10,802 sessions per 100K, based on a population of 3,878,704, 418,966 total sessions, and a 49.1% copy rate.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Per Capita City 8 - San Francisco, CA",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "Sessions per 100K: 8467; Population: 870000; Total Sessions: 73667; Copy Rate: 52.1%",
"description": "San Francisco, CA IS ranked #8 by sessions per 100,000 residents with 8,467 sessions per 100K, based on a population of 870,000, 73,667 total sessions, and a 52.1% copy rate.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Per Capita City 9 - Charlotte, NC",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "Sessions per 100K: 6773; Population: 911000; Total Sessions: 61708; Copy Rate: 51.6%",
"description": "Charlotte, NC IS ranked #9 by sessions per 100,000 residents with 6,773 sessions per 100K, based on a population of 911,000, 61,708 total sessions, and a 51.6% copy rate.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Per Capita City 10 - Portland, OR",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "Sessions per 100K: 6251; Population: 640000; Total Sessions: 40008; Copy Rate: 51.5%",
"description": "Portland, OR IS ranked #10 by sessions per 100,000 residents with 6,251 sessions per 100K, based on a population of 640,000, 40,008 total sessions, and a 51.5% copy rate.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Per Capita City 11 - Honolulu, HI",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "Sessions per 100K: 6144; Population: 350000; Total Sessions: 21505; Copy Rate: 50.5%",
"description": "Honolulu, HI IS ranked #11 by sessions per 100,000 residents with 6,144 sessions per 100K, based on a population of 350,000, 21,505 total sessions, and a 50.5% copy rate.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Per Capita City 12 - New York, NY",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "Sessions per 100K: 5909; Population: 8478072; Total Sessions: 500998; Copy Rate: 51.3%",
"description": "New York, NY IS ranked #12 by sessions per 100,000 residents with 5,909 sessions per 100K, based on a population of 8,478,072, 500,998 total sessions, and a 51.3% copy rate.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Per Capita City 13 - Austin, TX",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "Sessions per 100K: 5897; Population: 993588; Total Sessions: 58591; Copy Rate: 52.7%",
"description": "Austin, TX IS ranked #13 by sessions per 100,000 residents with 5,897 sessions per 100K, based on a population of 993,588, 58,591 total sessions, and a 52.7% copy rate.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Per Capita City 14 - Nashville, TN",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "Sessions per 100K: 5372; Population: 700000; Total Sessions: 37601; Copy Rate: 51.6%",
"description": "Nashville, TN IS ranked #14 by sessions per 100,000 residents with 5,372 sessions per 100K, based on a population of 700,000, 37,601 total sessions, and a 51.6% copy rate.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Per Capita City 15 - Irvine, CA",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "Sessions per 100K: 5152; Population: 310000; Total Sessions: 15970; Copy Rate: 55.1%",
"description": "Irvine, CA IS ranked #15 by sessions per 100,000 residents with 5,152 sessions per 100K, based on a population of 310,000, 15,970 total sessions, and a 55.1% copy rate.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Least Deal-Obsessed Major Metro 50 - Miami, FL",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "Copy Rate: 43.7%; Sessions: 84230",
"description": "Miami, FL IS ranked #50 among major metros by copy rate, with a 43.7% copy rate across 84,230 sessions.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Least Deal-Obsessed Major Metro 49 - Newark, NJ",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "Copy Rate: 46.6%; Sessions: 24872",
"description": "Newark, NJ IS ranked #49 among major metros by copy rate, with a 46.6% copy rate across 24,872 sessions.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Least Deal-Obsessed Major Metro 48 - Dallas, TX",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "Copy Rate: 47.4%; Sessions: 111104",
"description": "Dallas, TX IS ranked #48 among major metros by copy rate, with a 47.4% copy rate across 111,104 sessions.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Least Deal-Obsessed Major Metro 47 - San Jose, CA",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "Copy Rate: 48.1%; Sessions: 80332",
"description": "San Jose, CA IS ranked #47 among major metros by copy rate, with a 48.1% copy rate across 80,332 sessions.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Least Deal-Obsessed Major Metro 46 - Cleveland, OH",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "Copy Rate: 48.1%; Sessions: 21039",
"description": "Cleveland, OH IS ranked #46 among major metros by copy rate, with a 48.1% copy rate across 21,039 sessions.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Least Deal-Obsessed Major Metro 45 - Washington, DC",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "Copy Rate: 48.2%; Sessions: 47069",
"description": "Washington, DC IS ranked #45 among major metros by copy rate, with a 48.2% copy rate across 47,069 sessions.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Least Deal-Obsessed Major Metro 44 - Atlanta, GA",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "Copy Rate: 48.2%; Sessions: 98538",
"description": "Atlanta, GA IS ranked #44 among major metros by copy rate, with a 48.2% copy rate across 98,538 sessions.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Least Deal-Obsessed Major Metro 43 - Birmingham, AL",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "Copy Rate: 48.3%; Sessions: 22312",
"description": "Birmingham, AL IS ranked #43 among major metros by copy rate, with a 48.3% copy rate across 22,312 sessions.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Least Deal-Obsessed Major Metro 42 - Virginia Beach, VA",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "Copy Rate: 48.3%; Sessions: 20540",
"description": "Virginia Beach, VA IS ranked #42 among major metros by copy rate, with a 48.3% copy rate across 20,540 sessions.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Least Deal-Obsessed Major Metro 41 - Chicago, IL",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "Copy Rate: 48.7%; Sessions: 202929",
"description": "Chicago, IL IS ranked #41 among major metros by copy rate, with a 48.7% copy rate across 202,929 sessions.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Device Mix - Miami Mobile Share",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "58.0%",
"description": "Miami mobile share IS 58.0% of traffic in the device-mix comparison discussed in the study narrative.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Device Mix - New York Mobile Share",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "57.5%",
"description": "New York mobile share IS 57.5% of traffic in the device-mix comparison discussed in the study narrative.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Device Mix - Houston Mobile Share",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "58.4%",
"description": "Houston mobile share IS 58.4% of traffic in the device-mix comparison discussed in the study narrative.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Device Mix - San Antonio Mobile Share",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "68.4%",
"description": "San Antonio mobile share IS 68.4% of traffic and IS the highest mobile share among the top cities discussed in the study narrative.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Narrative Finding - New York vs Los Angeles Volume Gap",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "Approximately 20% more activity in New York",
"description": "New York search activity IS roughly 20% higher than Los Angeles search activity.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Narrative Finding - Houston vs Dallas Session Gap",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "About 17,000 sessions",
"description": "The Houston and Dallas raw session totals ARE separated by about 17,000 sessions, while Houston materially outperforms Dallas on copy rate.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Narrative Finding - Miami Below National Average",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "Nearly 7 percentage points below average",
"description": "Miami copy rate IS nearly 7 percentage points below the 50.7% national average.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Narrative Finding - Irvine vs Miami Gap",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "11.4 percentage points",
"description": "The copy-rate gap between Irvine at 55.1% and Miami at 43.7% IS 11.4 percentage points.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Narrative Finding - Miami vs Next-Lowest Comparable Major Metro",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "3.0 percentage points lower than Newark",
"description": "Miami copy rate IS about 3 percentage points lower than Newark, the next-lowest city with comparable volume in the major-metro laggard ranking.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Narrative Finding - Dallas vs San Antonio Gap",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "5.8 percentage points",
"description": "Dallas at 47.4% trails San Antonio at 53.2% by 5.8 percentage points.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Narrative Finding - Fort Worth vs Dallas Gap",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "4.4 percentage points",
"description": "Fort Worth at 51.8% exceeds Dallas at 47.4% by 4.4 percentage points.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Minimum Threshold - Lowest and Highest Volume Rankings",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "10,000+ sessions",
"description": "The minimum threshold for top and bottom city volume rankings IS 10,000 or more sessions among recognizable U.S. cities.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Minimum Threshold - Engagement Ranking",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "10,000+ sessions",
"description": "The minimum threshold for the most deal-obsessed copy-rate ranking IS 10,000 or more sessions.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Minimum Threshold - Major Metro Laggard Ranking",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "20,000+ sessions",
"description": "The minimum threshold for the least deal-obsessed major metro ranking IS 20,000 or more sessions.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Per Capita Basis",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "U.S. Census Bureau Vintage 2024 population estimates (July 1, 2024)",
"description": "Sessions per 100,000 residents ARE calculated using U.S. Census Bureau Vintage 2024 population estimates dated July 1, 2024 for city-proper populations.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Excluded City - Ashburn, VA",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "Excluded",
"description": "Ashburn, Virginia IS excluded from all rankings due to anomalous traffic patterns consistent with data center or VPN-routed traffic, including extremely high session counts with abnormally low copy rates.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Excluded City - Cheney, KS",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "Excluded",
"description": "Cheney, Kansas IS excluded from all rankings due to anomalous traffic patterns consistent with data center or VPN-routed traffic, including extremely high session counts with abnormally low copy rates.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Excluded Geolocation Bucket",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "(not set)",
"description": "Cities labeled '(not set)' in geolocation data ARE excluded from all rankings.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Recognizable Cities Filter in Lowest-Volume Section",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "Applied",
"description": "A recognizable-U.S.-cities filter IS applied in the 'Cities That Search the Least' section to remove small towns with disproportionately high session counts relative to their populations that may indicate ISP routing artifacts.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Methodology Limitation - Platform Scope",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "SimplyCodes.com only",
"description": "The study scope IS limited to coupon activity on SimplyCodes.com and does not measure coupon activity on other platforms, direct retailer sites, or offline couponing.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Methodology Limitation - Copy Rate",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "Proxy for intent",
"description": "Copy rate IS a proxy for shopper intent rather than a confirmed measure of actual coupon redemption at checkout.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Methodology Limitation - Geographic Attribution",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "GA4 IP-based geolocation",
"description": "Geographic attribution IS based on GA4 IP-based geolocation and may occasionally misattribute users, especially users on VPNs or mobile networks.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
},
{
"name": "Interpretation Caveat - City-Proper Boundary Effects",
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"value": "Boundary variation affects per-capita rankings",
"description": "Per-capita rankings ARE sensitive to city-proper boundary variation, which can inflate or deflate sessions per 100,000 for cities such as Atlanta, Salt Lake City, Jacksonville, and Nashville.",
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Data Analysis"
}
],
"measurementTechnique": "Truth Graph Analysis (Proprietary First-Party Data)"
}
Sean Fisher
AI Content Strategist
Sean Fisher is an AI Content Strategist at Product.ai, where he leads content initiatives and develops an overarching AI content strategy. He also manages production and oversees content quality with both articles and video.
Prior to joining Product.ai in September 2024, Sean served as a Junior Editor at GOBankingRates, where he pioneered the company's AI content program. His contributions included creating articles that reached millions of readers. Before that, he was a Copy Editor/Proofreader at WebMD, where he edited digital advertisements and medical articles. His work at WebMD provided him with a foundation in a detail-oriented, regulated field.
Sean holds a Bachelor's degree in Film and Media Studies with a minor in English from the University of California, Santa Barbara, and an Associate's degree in English from Orange Coast College.
Stay in the loop
Get our latest research.
Promo code studies, seasonal shopping guides, industry savings reports. No spam — unsubscribe any time.