Exercise trainers and group fitness instructors

SOC 39-9031 · 39-0000 · Score reference month August 2026

Instruct or coach groups or individuals in exercise activities for the primary purpose of personal fitness. Demonstrate techniques and form, observe participants, and explain to them corrective measures necessary to improve their skills. Develop and implement individualized approaches to exercise.

In short

The national Job Market Health score is in the Balanced band for August 2026.

Job Market Health score

58/ 100
Balanced

Weakening · -1

Confidence
High
Restated score
58
Methodology
v1.0
Geography
US
  • At least 90% of required inputs and occupation-industry mapping are covered.

Job Market Health scores are derived indicators based on published data, informational only, not a forecast or guarantee.

$47,160Median annual wageOEWS May 2025
68,000Projected annual openingsBLS Employment Projections 2025-2035
+7.3%Projected growth2025–2035
322,930Total employmentOEWS May 2025

Latest interpretation

What stands out for exercise trainers and group fitness instructors

The clearest signals from the latest validated score, outlook and metro data.

Long-term outlook is the strongest component

Long-term outlook scores 91/100, compared with 30/100 for current demand, a 61-point difference.

JobMarketHealth score components

Published long-term outlook

BLS projects 68,000 average annual openings and +7.3% employment growth from 2025 to 2035. Projected openings are a modeled annual average, not vacancies open today.

BLS Employment Projections

Largest published metro market

New York-Newark-Jersey City, NY-NJ has the largest published metro employment count for exercise trainers and group fitness instructors, at 22,970 jobs. The next-largest published metro is Chicago-Naperville-Elgin, IL-IN with 16,350 jobs. This measures employment scale, not market quality.

BLS OEWS

Local market context

QCEW industry conditions for this occupation’s employment mix

Choose a state to see how the industries that employ this occupation are performing locally.

Choose a state above to explore its available industry context.

How to read this section

QCEW measures employment and wages by industry, not by occupation. We weight those industry conditions using the published industry mix for this occupation. These figures describe the industries that employ this occupation; they are not direct counts of people working in the occupation or jobs currently open.

Source: BLS QCEW. This section is not part of the national 0 to 100 Job Market Health score. See the methodology.

Compare states for exercise trainers and group fitness instructorsSide-by-side published industry conditions for two or three states. There is no state-level health score; the 0 to 100 score is national.

How to read this page

The score is a national composite from 0 to 100 that weights near term hiring demand at 50 percent, the occupation's own employment fundamentals at 30 percent, and long-term outlook at 20 percent. Wages and occupation profile details are context shown alongside it, not score inputs. See the full methodology.

Median annual wage and metro employment come from BLS OEWS, which is annual. Projected annual openings and projected growth come from BLS Employment Projections and describe the published projection horizon, so they are not a count of jobs open today. Values shown as not published are suppressed by the source rather than filled in here.

Job Market Health trend

Published composite score · 0–100 · by reference month

Latest published values
  • Aug 2658 / 100
View values: Job Market Health history
Job Market Health history
Reference monthScore / 100
Jan 2568
Feb 2565
Mar 2563
Apr 2561
May 2566
Jun 2566
Jul 2567
Aug 2565
Sep 2566
Oct 2567
Nov 2567
Dec 2566
Jan 2667
Feb 2666
Mar 2665
Apr 2662
May 2663
Jun 2660
Jul 2659
Aug 2658

Score components

The three published inputs behind the composite · each 0–100

Current demand30 / 100
Occupation fundamentals84 / 100
Long-term outlook91 / 100

Largest metro markets by employment

OEWS employment count, where the jobs are, not a quality ranking

OEWS May 2025. These occupation counts describe the survey reference period.

Linked metro names open overall job-market profiles.

Compare cities for this career →

Employment · number of jobs

  • New York-Newark-Jersey City, NY-NJ22,970
  • Chicago-Naperville-Elgin, IL-IN16,350
  • Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim, CA16,350
  • Washington-Arlington-Alexandria, DC-VA-MD-WV10,440
  • Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington, PA-NJ-DE-MD7,820
  • Boston-Cambridge-Newton, MA-NH7,350
  • San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont, CA6,820
  • Denver-Aurora-Centennial, CO6,020
  • Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington, TX5,870
  • Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue, WA5,800
Largest metro markets by employment
Metro areaEmploymentJobs per 1,000Median annual wage
New York-Newark-Jersey City, NY-NJ22,9702.42$53,580
Chicago-Naperville-Elgin, IL-IN16,3503.62$47,680
Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim, CA16,3502.61$57,630
Washington-Arlington-Alexandria, DC-VA-MD-WV10,4403.33$46,190
Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington, PA-NJ-DE-MD7,8202.70$48,040
Boston-Cambridge-Newton, MA-NH7,3502.72$65,190
San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont, CA6,8202.87$61,000
Denver-Aurora-Centennial, CO6,0203.74$50,580
Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington, TX5,8701.45$45,690
Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue, WA5,8002.78$56,380

Education & training

Typical entry requirements · BLS Employment Projections 2025-2035

Typical education
High school diploma or equivalent
Work experience
None
On-the-job training
Short-term on-the-job training
Projected employment
416,900 jobs

Top skills

Occupation profile · O*NET 31.0 Database

  • Instructing
  • Service Orientation
  • Speaking
  • Active Listening
  • Learning Strategies
  • Social Perceptiveness
  • Active Learning
  • Coordination
  • Critical Thinking
  • Judgment and Decision Making

Also known as: Aerobics Instructor, Fitness Instructor, Fitness Specialist, Fitness Trainer, Group Exercise Instructor, Group Fitness Instructor

AI & this occupation

How AI relates to Exercise trainers and group fitness instructors work

Across 4 research exposure measures, Exercise trainers and group fitness instructors is in the lower technical AI exposure band based on the mean of the available source-specific percentile ranks. Exposure describes how much of the work the studied AI capabilities could technically assist with; it is not a forecast of job loss.

The saved Anthropic task-exposure benchmark records a zero index for this occupation. This is not proof of no AI use; the observation window is not recorded in this saved release.

In the task mix derived from the March 27, 2025 Anthropic release, 100.0% followed augmentation patterns (people iterating, validating or learning with AI), based on 4 matched tasks.

JobMarketHealth has not measured an AI effect on this occupation's employment or wages, and these figures do not enter its scores; there is no clear evidence of displacement in the data shown here.

Technical AI exposureLower exposureMean of 4 available source-specific percentile ranks (4 measures checked); fixed exposure bands, not a national rank of the composite
Dated Claude task exposureLower thirdObserved task-exposure benchmark 0.000; observation window not recorded
Business AI use (BTOS Core)24.6%U.S. businesses using AI, two weeks ending 2026-10-04; all industries, not this occupation
Historical task mix (2025)100.0% augmentationMarch 27, 2025 release; 0.0% automation, 4 matched tasks
Measured labor-market effectNot estimatedJobMarketHealth does not attribute employment or wage changes to AI

Exposure measures (kept separate)

  • GPTs are GPTs exposure (β, GPT-4 rated): 0.01 of 1, national percentile 6 (lower third)
  • Microsoft AI applicability: 0.12 of 1, national percentile 39 (middle third)
  • AIOE (Felten, Raj & Seamans): -2.11 (standardized), national percentile 0 (lower third)
  • OECD AI Capability Gap (lower gap = higher potential exposure): gap 3.8 of 23, national percentile 41 (middle third)
OECD capability gap by domain

As published by the OECD: the gap between what the occupation demands (0-5) and current AI capability in each domain. A lower gap means AI is closer to the requirement (higher potential exposure); 0 means AI already meets it or the domain is not relevant.

  • Language: gap 0.10 (demand 3.10 of 5)
  • Social interaction: gap 2.00 (demand 4.00 of 5)
  • Problem solving: gap 1.40 (demand 3.40 of 5)
  • Creativity: gap 0.00 (demand 2.15 of 5)
  • Metacognition & critical thinking: gap 1.05 (demand 3.05 of 5)
  • Knowledge, learning & memory: gap 0.75 (demand 3.75 of 5)
  • Vision: gap 0.75 (demand 3.75 of 5)
  • Manipulation: gap 1.25 (demand 3.25 of 5)
  • Robotic intelligence: gap 1.50 (demand 3.50 of 5)

National context: what businesses used generative AI for

From the Census 2025-26 BTOS AI Supplement (all industries; businesses whose employees used generative AI). Census did not measure Exercise trainers and group fitness instructors specifically.

  • Writing or editing documents, emails, or communications: 85.4%
  • Searching for information or technical help: 49.9%
  • Interpreting, analyzing, translating, or summarizing documents: 44.6%
  • Information processing, paperwork, or filing: 34.7%

Exposure and observed usage are separate measures and neither equals job loss. Census BTOS figures are business-level surveys and are not occupation-specific. Sources: GPTs are GPTs occupation exposure; Microsoft Working with AI: AI applicability; AI Occupational Exposure (AIOE); OECD AI Exposure Measure (AI Capability Gap); Anthropic Economic Index; Census BTOS Core AI Use; Census BTOS AI Supplement 2025-26. These figures do not affect Job Market Health scores. Explore AI & Jobs · How we use AI data.

Sources and methodology

The datasets behind the figures on this page

Job Market Health score
Score for reference month August 2026 · methodology v1.0 · MethodologyScore last recalculated Oct 2, 2026 · First published Sep 29, 2026
BLS Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics
Employment, wages and largest metros · OEWS May 2025 · publisher release May 15, 2026 · About this sourceRetrieved Sep 17, 2026
BLS Employment Projections
Projected growth, openings, education and training · BLS Employment Projections 2025-2035 · publisher release Aug 27, 2026 · About this sourceRetrieved Sep 17, 2026
O*NET
Skills, alternate titles and related occupations · O*NET 31.0 Database · publisher release date not verified · About this sourceRetrieved Oct 19, 2026

Values marked “Not published” are suppressed or not published by the source. We leave them blank rather than estimating them. Pipeline status for every source is on Data Status.

Related occupations

O*NET® lists these occupations as related. Each link opens the same published view of score, wages and outlook.

Evidence record

JobMarketHealth derived indicator; not a government statistic. The composite score is national and occupation level.

Occupation
Exercise trainers and group fitness instructors
SOC code
39-9031
Geography
United States
Reference month
August 2026
Published Job Market Health score
58 / 100
Restated score
58 / 100
Band
Balanced
Current Demand component
30 / 10050% weight
Occupation Fundamentals component
84 / 10030% weight
Long-Term Outlook component
91 / 10020% weight
Confidence
HighAt least 90% of required inputs and occupation-industry mapping are covered.
Methodology version
v1.0
Source vintage: Annual
EP-2025-2035|CPS-25b-2025|OEWS-2020-2025
Source vintage: Monthly calculated at
2026-10-02T15:32:36.209Z
First published at
Sep 29, 2026
Recalculated at
Oct 2, 2026
Canonical record URL
https://jobmarkethealth.com/occupations/exercise-trainers-and-group-fitness-instructors#evidence-record
Derived by
JobMarketHealth

Keep going

Learn how to judge a market from these numbers in how to tell if a job market is healthy, or why projected growth and annual openings often disagree in projected growth vs projected annual openings. Coverage, revisions and limits are explained on about the data.

The datasets behind these figures, and what each one can and cannot show, are set out on data sources.