There must always be a "most safe" and "least safe" state (by a given measure) - but if the spread between them is insignificant then that's not particularly important information. Even less so when the headline qualifies with "ranks among" so they're not even the actual least safe.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/1109011/coronavirus-covi...
Also, the methodology gave murders per Capita double weight and vaccine percentages double weight. Both are numbers bound between 0 and 1, and both have a significant impact on population safety.
So no, I'd much rather talk about why someone would make those weightings and what the correct ratings should be using a statistical analysis mixed with some judgements of how safe I feel in the face of those statistics.
https://cbsaustin.com/news/local/texas-oklahoma-ranked-among...
It turns out that it is wholly based on a corporate PR puff piece by Wallethub, with a very pseudoscientific and manipulative use of statistics to reach its conclusions. The arbitrary weight assigned to the entire category of physical and property crimes was 15%. Bullying incident count was weighted as more important than drug overdoses. And when factoring in Covid, they weighted based on vaccination rates - not actual local hospitalizations/deaths.
https://wallethub.com/edu/safest-states-to-live-in/4566