What Ethnic Group Has the Highest Infant Mortality Rate?

Non-Hispanic Black infants die before their first birthday at roughly twice the national average of about 5–6 per 1,000 live births, placing this group at the top of the list. American Indian and Alaska Native infants also sit well above the Non-Hispanic White benchmark, while Hispanic and Asian American infants generally post rates at or below the overall U.S. figure. Broad categories, however, can hide important subgroup variation, especially within Asian and Pacific Islander populations.

This detailed guide walks through the latest U.S. infant mortality figures broken down by race and ethnicity, helping parents, students, and health advocates understand which communities are most affected and why.

Non-Hispanic Black Infants Carry the Heaviest Burden in U.S. Data

Black infants die at a rate around 10–11 per 1,000 live births in recent CDC reporting, roughly double the national average. American Indian and Alaska Native infants post rates near 8–9 per 1,000, well above the Non-Hispanic White benchmark of roughly 4–5 per 1,000. Hispanic and Asian American infants typically land at or below the national average, a pattern that has held for decades across CDC releases.

“Roughly two Black infants die for every one Non-Hispanic White infant before age one. That ratio has narrowed only modestly since the mid-1990s.

The headline disparity has drawn sustained attention from organizations like the March of Dimes and Healthy People 2030, both of which track progress toward closing the gap as an explicit national goal.

Those national benchmarks only gain meaning once the underlying numbers are laid out side by side.

Where Each Group Falls in the National Ranking

A Side-by-Side Look at Rates Across Racial and Ethnic Groups

Comparing groups makes the disparity harder to miss. The table above reflects the most recent CDC reporting patterns, with figures varying slightly by year. Each row shows an approximate infant mortality rate per 1,000 live births and how it compares to the overall U.S. average.

The “Hispanic Paradox” in Birth Outcomes

Hispanic infants in the U.S. record infant mortality rates comparable to or lower than Non-Hispanic White infants, despite lower average household income on average. Epidemiologists call this the “Hispanic paradox,” and it remains incompletely explained. Candidate drivers include stronger multigenerational family support, lower rates of smoking during pregnancy in some Hispanic subgroups, and selective migration patterns.

Hidden Risk Inside Broad Asian/Pacific Islander Categories

Aggregated Asian/Pacific Islander data hides a striking divide. Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander infants die at roughly twice the rate of the broader Asian American average, closer to the levels seen in high-risk minority populations. Filipino infants also post somewhat elevated rates compared with East Asian and South Asian subgroups. Researchers have called for disaggregated data collection for years, and the CDC has begun releasing some subgroup breakdowns.

How Ethnicity Is Measured and Why Categories Can Mislead

Numbers like these are only as clean as the categories behind them. The CDC separates race from Hispanic ethnicity on birth and death certificates, which means someone can be both “Black” and “Hispanic” in the data. That overlap creates ambiguity when comparing groups.

The Race-Ethnicity Split in Federal Data

Federal race categories group very different populations together. “Asian” lumps together Chinese, Vietnamese, Filipino, Indian, and dozens of other communities. “Pacific Islander” merges Native Hawaiian, Samoan, Chamorro, and Tongan populations with distinct health profiles. The same problem applies to “American Indian/Alaska Native,” which covers more than 570 federally recognized tribes plus many state-recognized and unrecognized nations.

Why Self-Reporting Can Shift Over Generations

Classification depends on what the mother writes on the birth certificate, which can change as mixed-heritage families grow and identity norms shift. The share of infants classified as “multiracial” has roughly tripled over the past two decades. Trend comparisons spanning 20+ years must account for that drift.

Category drift can inflate or mask those very disparities, so measurement choices deserve scrutiny before turning to biology.

“When you see an “Asian/Pacific Islander” infant mortality rate, treat it as a starting point. Subgroup data almost always tells a more complicated story.

The Leading Medical Causes Behind the Disparity

Numbers describe the scale; causes explain the mechanism. The biggest drivers of infant mortality across all groups are preterm birth, low birth weight, congenital anomalies, and sudden unexpected infant death. The share each cause contributes differs sharply by ethnicity.

Preterm Birth and Low Birth Weight

Babies born before 37 weeks or weighing under 2,500 grams account for the single largest share of U.S. infant deaths each year.S. infant deaths. Black mothers deliver preterm at a rate roughly 50% higher than White mothers, a gap that persists even after controlling for income, education, and insurance status.

Sudden Infant Death Syndrome

SIDS, the sudden unexplained death of an infant under one year, strikes Non-Hispanic Black infants at roughly twice the rate seen in Non-Hispanic White infants. American Indian/Alaska Native infants also post elevated SIDS rates. Safe-sleep practices reduce risk, but uptake varies by community.

Congenital Anomalies and Birth Defects

Congenital anomalies are the leading cause of infant death for Non-Hispanic White and Hispanic infants, while preterm-related causes dominate for Non-Hispanic Black infants. Some minority populations also face higher rates of specific birth defects tied to nutritional or environmental factors.

Maternal Health Conditions

Maternal hypertension, diabetes, and obesity during pregnancy feed directly into newborn outcomes. Non-Hispanic Black mothers have the highest rates of hypertension in pregnancy and one of the highest maternal mortality rates in the developed world. Those conditions raise preterm and low birth weight risk, which in turn raise infant mortality risk.

Structural and Social Factors Driving the Gap

Medical causes don’t appear out of thin air. The disparity in infant mortality traces back to social conditions that shape maternal health long before delivery.

Unequal Access to Prenatal Care

Early and consistent prenatal care gives clinicians a chance to catch hypertension, gestational diabetes, and fetal growth problems before they turn fatal. Black and American Indian mothers are less likely to begin care in the first trimester, more likely to face insurance coverage gaps, and more likely to live in counties with provider shortages.

Chronic Stress and Discrimination

Chronic stress from discrimination, neighborhood segregation, and environmental exposures has been tied by researchers to elevated maternal hypertension and preterm risk. The “weathering” hypothesis, advanced by public-health scholar Arline Geronimus, holds that the health of Black women can deteriorate earlier in life due to sustained exposure to social and economic adversity.

Income and Education Aren’t the Whole Story

Black mothers with a college degree still face higher infant mortality risk than White mothers without a high-school diploma. The gap narrows at the top of the income scale but never closes, pointing to non-economic drivers like discrimination, provider bias, and segregated care networks.

U.S. Infant Mortality in Global Context

The U.S. overall rate of around 5–6 per 1,000 is higher than nearly every other high-income country. Countries like Finland, Japan, and Iceland post rates below 2 per 1,000. Globally, countries in sub-Saharan Africa, including Sierra Leone, the Central African Republic, and Somalia, consistently rank with the highest national infant mortality rates, often above 70 per 1,000 live births. The U.S. disparity between Black and White infants would itself stand out as a national emergency in any peer country.

Trends Over Time and Initiatives Closing the Gap

The absolute numbers have declined since the 1990s, but the ratio between Black and White infant mortality has barely budged. That stubborn gap is the target of a growing list of programs.

Long-Term Trend in the Black-to-White Gap

Back in 1995, the Black-to-White infant mortality ratio hovered near 2.5-to-1. Today it sits closer to 2.0-to-1. That represents real progress in absolute terms, modest narrowing in relative terms. Closing the gap fully would require reducing Black infant mortality by another 40–50%.

Programs Showing Measurable Results

• ▸Healthy Start: A federal program funding community-based maternal and infant health services in high-risk neighborhoods, shown to reduce infant mortality in participating communities.
• ▸Group prenatal care: CenteringPregnancy-style models combining clinical checkups with peer support have reduced preterm birth rates by roughly 30–40% in published trials.
• ▸Doula and community health worker programs: Pilot programs in cities like New York, Chicago, and Atlanta have shown reduced preterm births and improved birth outcomes among Black mothers.
• ▸Medicaid postpartum extensions: Several states have extended Medicaid coverage from 60 days to 12 months postpartum, improving continuity of care for chronic conditions like hypertension and diabetes.
• ▸Home visiting services: Nurse-Family Partnership and similar models send nurses into homes during pregnancy and infancy, with documented reductions in infant mortality among enrolled families.

“Closing the gap won’t come from any single program. The strongest evidence points to combining clinical investment, maternal health policy, and structural reforms that address segregation, provider bias, and care access.

Bottom Line

Non-Hispanic Black infants face the highest infant mortality rate of any racial or ethnic group in the U.S., at roughly twice the national average. American Indian and Alaska Native infants come next, while Hispanic and Asian American infants generally post rates at or below average, with important subgroup variation hiding inside those broad labels. The gap is driven by a stack of medical and social factors, including preterm birth, maternal health conditions, prenatal care access, and chronic stress linked to structural inequities. Closing it will take coordinated clinical, policy, and structural reform.

FAQ