If you’re single and ready to mingle, the city you live in could be helping — or hurting — your chances of finding love, a new study says.

WalletHub, a personal finance company, recently released its Best & Worst Cities for Singles report. It measured 182 U.S. cities across 35 indicators of dating friendliness that fall into three main categories: economics (e.g., the average price of a cocktail or a meal for two); fun and recreation (e.g., the number of restaurants and parks per capita); and dating opportunities (e.g., the share of the population that’s single).

Of the 35 metrics used, the ones that carried the most weight in the rankings were the share of single population and the gender balance of those singles, WalletHub analyst Cassandra Happe told HuffPost. (The gender balance refers to the ratio of single men to single women and assumes people are seeking opposite-sex partners, which isn’t the case for everyone and a limitation of the study.)

In a writeup of the study on the WalletHub website, Happe explained how the place you live can have a notable impact on your dating life.

“If a city has a high population of singles and is packed with activities that you’ll enjoy, then you’ll have a better chance to meet someone with similar interests and can go on higher-quality dates,” she said. “In the current economy, a city that minimizes costs through inexpensive restaurants and venues, plus free things to do, is especially attractive.”

Below are the 10 best — and 10 worst — cities for singles. To see the rest of the list, head over to WalletHub.

The 10 Best Cities For Singles

The 10 Worst Cities For Singles

10. Winston-Salem, North Carolina

When asked if she was surprised by any of the findings, Happe pointed to Las Vegas securing the No. 2 spot on the “Best Cities” list, as it challenges many people’s preconceived notions about Sin City.

Thomas Barwick via Getty Images

If you live in one of the cities that appears further down on the list, try not to get discouraged. Blaine Anderson, a dating coach for men, said she occasionally has clients complain to her that their city is “bad” for dating. But she told HuffPost she doesn’t “take much stock in blanket complaints like this.”

“Any city of 100,000-plus people is going to have a lot of awesome singles. If your city feels ‘bad’ for dating, being blunt, the problem probably has more to do with your mindset and lifestyle than your city, or the other singles inhabiting it,” Anderson said. “You can find genuine, loving people anywhere. The trick is designing a life that puts you in positions to meet them.”

She does acknowledge, though, that living in a small town can pose some dating challenges.

“For example, if you live in a town of 2,000 people, your dating pool is limited. It’s obviously easier said than done, but you may need to spend time in — or, realistically, move to — a more populated area if you want to meet more people you’re compatible with,” Anderson said.

And it may be the case that a particular city is a better or worse fit for an individual person, “depending on their goals and values,” Anderson said.

“For example, if you’re seeking a partner who loves to spend time outdoors, and you’re hoping to start a family in your early 20s, New York City might be a tougher dating environment than Asheville or Portland,” she said. “Every city has its own ethos — if you feel at odds, value-wise, with the city you live in, you may have a harder time finding a compatible partner there than you would elsewhere.”

Interestingly, Anderson said she often hears men who live in tech hubs like San Francisco and Seattle — ranked No. 1 on this list — say their city “sucks for dating.”

“Some guys even come armed with demographic data — e.g., ‘my neighborhood is 55% male!’ — but I think this misses the point,” she said. “There are still thousands of eligible single women nearby. Dating is hard literally everywhere if you don’t step outside of your comfort zone to meet new people.”