State hub ยท NH
Safest cities in New Hampshire? Lowest and highest property-crime candidates
Use this hub to compare validated New Hampshire city candidates by reported selected property-offense rate. It is a cautious city-page index, not a statewide safety ranking or personal-risk score.
Candidate-city rate
6.90
per 1,000 residents across listed cities; not a statewide risk score
Validated cities62Current candidate pages
Candidate population646,097Sum of listed city estimates
Selected offenses4,455FBI NIBRS offense records
Highest-rate city candidates
Use the city pages for source notes, trend handling, and offense mix. Small or ambiguous places remain outside automatic publication.
Seabrook
24.54 selected property offenses per 1,000 residents
Conway
22.17 selected property offenses per 1,000 residents
Salem
20.40 selected property offenses per 1,000 residents
Epping
18.50 selected property offenses per 1,000 residents
Plymouth
16.45 selected property offenses per 1,000 residents
Littleton
13.64 selected property offenses per 1,000 residents
Lowest-rate city candidates
Searchers often ask for the safest cities in a state. This section answers that intent carefully by showing the lowest reported selected property-offense rates among validated city candidates only.
Atkinson
0.95 selected property offenses per 1,000 residents
Nottingham
1.28 selected property offenses per 1,000 residents
Litchfield
1.52 selected property offenses per 1,000 residents
New Boston
1.61 selected property offenses per 1,000 residents
Weare
1.73 selected property offenses per 1,000 residents
Sandown
1.79 selected property offenses per 1,000 residents
Home-security guides
City data pages point into practical guides for renters, no-subscription setups, package areas, cameras, and entry alerts.
Door and window alarms for renters
Compare simple entry alarms for apartments, rented homes, garages, and windows before moving into heavier systems.
No-subscription home security starter kit
Build a basic home-security setup with local alarms, lighting, locks, and cameras without starting with a monthly plan.
Package theft camera checklist
Check porch visibility, driveway angles, storage, Wi-Fi, and evidence needs before buying a camera for package areas.
Security camera checklist
Evaluate exterior visibility, entry coverage, storage needs, and placement before choosing a camera system.
Smart lock and entry sensor checklist
Start with reliable locks, entry sensors, lighting, and backup access before adding convenience features.
Basic home-security checklist
A balanced setup can cover entries, packages, motion, lighting, and alerts without overbuying.
New Hampshire city candidates
| City | Population | Selected offenses | Rate per 1,000 | Trend |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Seabrook | 8,436 | 207 | 24.54 | Roughly stable |
| Conway | 10,283 | 228 | 22.17 | Increasing |
| Salem | 31,622 | 645 | 20.40 | Increasing |
| Epping | 7,783 | 144 | 18.50 | Increasing |
| Plymouth | 6,688 | 110 | 16.45 | Roughly stable |
| Littleton | 6,012 | 82 | 13.64 | Roughly stable |
| Hudson | 25,787 | 304 | 11.79 | Increasing |
| Gilford | 7,893 | 92 | 11.66 | Roughly stable |
| Jaffrey | 5,595 | 56 | 10.01 | Increasing |
| Amherst | 11,920 | 111 | 9.31 | Roughly stable |
| Bedford | 23,866 | 208 | 8.72 | Mixed |
| Rindge | 6,487 | 52 | 8.02 | Decreasing |
| Belmont | 7,414 | 59 | 7.96 | Decreasing |
| Northfield | 5,057 | 40 | 7.91 | Decreasing |
| Plaistow | 7,846 | 61 | 7.77 | Increasing |
| Hampton | 16,419 | 127 | 7.73 | Roughly stable |
| Farmington | 6,833 | 52 | 7.61 | Decreasing |
| Derry | 34,036 | 254 | 7.46 | Roughly stable |
| Hillsborough | 6,089 | 44 | 7.23 | Increasing |
| Barnstead | 5,029 | 34 | 6.76 | Roughly stable |
| Newport | 6,402 | 43 | 6.72 | Mixed |
| New Ipswich | 5,403 | 33 | 6.11 | Increasing |
| Wolfeboro | 6,607 | 39 | 5.90 | Roughly stable |
| Hooksett | 15,320 | 89 | 5.81 | Decreasing |
| Alton | 6,042 | 35 | 5.79 | Increasing |
| Meredith | 6,841 | 38 | 5.55 | Decreasing |
| Exeter | 16,225 | 87 | 5.36 | Roughly stable |
| Wakefield | 5,542 | 29 | 5.23 | Decreasing |
| Pelham | 14,681 | 73 | 4.97 | Decreasing |
| Goffstown | 18,556 | 88 | 4.74 | Decreasing |
| Hanover | 12,075 | 57 | 4.72 | Decreasing |
| Peterborough | 6,456 | 30 | 4.65 | Decreasing |
| Moultonborough | 5,248 | 24 | 4.57 | Increasing |
| Swanzey | 7,471 | 34 | 4.55 | Increasing |
| Milford | 16,532 | 75 | 4.54 | Roughly stable |
| Londonderry | 27,078 | 122 | 4.51 | Decreasing |
| Bow | 8,377 | 34 | 4.06 | Decreasing |
| Loudon | 5,749 | 23 | 4.00 | Decreasing |
| Epsom | 5,020 | 20 | 3.98 | Mixed |
| Henniker | 6,228 | 24 | 3.85 | Decreasing |
| Newmarket | 9,518 | 36 | 3.78 | Increasing |
| Hampstead | 9,115 | 33 | 3.62 | Roughly stable |
| Rye | 5,651 | 20 | 3.54 | Mixed |
| Merrimack | 29,336 | 103 | 3.51 | Decreasing |
| Brookline | 5,816 | 20 | 3.44 | Increasing |
| Raymond | 11,023 | 37 | 3.36 | Decreasing |
| Hollis | 8,754 | 29 | 3.31 | Roughly stable |
| Stratham | 7,742 | 25 | 3.23 | Roughly stable |
| Barrington | 9,607 | 30 | 3.12 | Decreasing |
| Pembroke | 7,524 | 23 | 3.06 | Decreasing |
| Auburn | 6,247 | 16 | 2.56 | Decreasing |
| Hopkinton | 6,118 | 15 | 2.45 | Decreasing |
| Durham | 15,420 | 35 | 2.27 | Mixed |
| Windham | 16,167 | 36 | 2.23 | Mixed |
| Kingston | 6,298 | 14 | 2.22 | Increasing |
| Chester | 5,301 | 11 | 2.08 | Decreasing |
| Sandown | 6,714 | 12 | 1.79 | Decreasing |
| Weare | 9,229 | 16 | 1.73 | Roughly stable |
| New Boston | 6,216 | 10 | 1.61 | Increasing |
| Litchfield | 8,553 | 13 | 1.52 | Decreasing |
| Nottingham | 5,457 | 7 | 1.28 | Decreasing |
| Atkinson | 7,343 | 7 | 0.95 | Decreasing |
Important context
These figures are based on reported selected property offenses and Census population context for validated city candidates. Agency reporting boundaries can differ from municipal boundaries, so the methodology page explains why ambiguous or tiny-denominator rows stay out of automatic publication.