Burmese vs Slavic Community Comparison

COMPARE

Burmese
Race
Ancestry
AfghanAfricanAlaska NativeAlaskan AthabascanAlbanianAleutAlsatianAmericanApacheArabArapahoArgentineanArmenianAssyrian/Chaldean/SyriacAustralianAustrianBahamianBangladeshiBarbadianBasqueBelgianBelizeanBermudanBhutaneseBlackfeetBolivianBrazilianBritishBritish West IndianBulgarianBurmeseCajunCambodianCanadianCape VerdeanCarpatho RusynCelticCentral AmericanCentral American IndianCherokeeCheyenneChickasawChileanChineseChippewaChoctawColombianColvilleComancheCosta RicanCreeCreekCroatianCrowCubanCypriotCzechCzechoslovakianDanishDelawareDominicanDutchDutch West IndianEastern EuropeanEcuadorianEgyptianEnglishEstonianEthiopianEuropeanFijianFilipinoFinnishFrenchFrench American IndianFrench CanadianGermanGerman RussianGhanaianGreekGuamanian/ChamorroGuatemalanGuyaneseHaitianHmongHonduranHopiHoumaHungarianIcelanderIndian (Asian)IndonesianInupiatIranianIraqiIrishIroquoisIsraeliItalianJamaicanJapaneseJordanianKenyanKiowaKoreanLaotianLatvianLebaneseLiberianLithuanianLumbeeLuxembourgerMacedonianMalaysianMalteseMarshalleseMenomineeMexicanMexican American IndianMongolianMoroccanNative HawaiianNavajoNepaleseNew ZealanderNicaraguanNigerianNorthern EuropeanNorwegianOkinawanOsageOttawaPaiutePakistaniPalestinianPanamanianParaguayanPennsylvania GermanPeruvianPimaPolishPortuguesePotawatomiPuebloPuerto RicanPuget Sound SalishRomanianRussianSalvadoranSamoanScandinavianScotch-IrishScottishSeminoleSenegaleseSerbianShoshoneSierra LeoneanSiouxSlovakSloveneSomaliSouth AfricanSouth AmericanSouth American IndianSoviet UnionSpaniardSpanishSpanish AmericanSpanish American IndianSri LankanSubsaharan AfricanSudaneseSwedishSwissSyrianTaiwaneseThaiTlingit-HaidaTohono O'OdhamTonganTrinidadian and TobagonianTsimshianTurkishU.S. Virgin IslanderUgandanUkrainianUruguayanUteVenezuelanVietnameseWelshWest IndianYakamaYaquiYugoslavianYumanYup'ikZimbabwean
Immigration
NonimmigrantsImmigrantsAfghanistanAfricaAlbaniaArgentinaArmeniaAsiaAustraliaAustriaBahamasBangladeshBarbadosBelarusBelgiumBelizeBoliviaBosnia and HerzegovinaBrazilBulgariaBurma/MyanmarCabo VerdeCambodiaCameroonCanadaCaribbeanCentral AmericaChileChinaColombiaCongoCosta RicaCroatiaCubaCzechoslovakiaDenmarkDominicaDominican RepublicEastern AfricaEastern AsiaEastern EuropeEcuadorEgyptEl SalvadorEnglandEritreaEthiopiaEuropeFijiFranceGermanyGhanaGreeceGrenadaGuatemalaGuyanaHaitiHondurasHong KongHungaryIndiaIndonesiaIranIraqIrelandIsraelItalyJamaicaJapanJordanKazakhstanKenyaKoreaKuwaitLaosLatin AmericaLatviaLebanonLiberiaLithuaniaMalaysiaMexicoMicronesiaMiddle AfricaMoldovaMoroccoNepalNetherlandsNicaraguaNigeriaNorth AmericaNorth MacedoniaNorthern AfricaNorthern EuropeNorwayOceaniaPakistanPanamaPeruPhilippinesPolandPortugalRomaniaRussiaSaudi ArabiaScotlandSenegalSerbiaSierra LeoneSingaporeSomaliaSouth AfricaSouth AmericaSouth Central AsiaSouth Eastern AsiaSouthern EuropeSpainSri LankaSt. Vincent and the GrenadinesSudanSwedenSwitzerlandSyriaTaiwanThailandTrinidad and TobagoTurkeyUgandaUkraineUruguayUzbekistanVenezuelaVietnamWest IndiesWestern AfricaWestern AsiaWestern EuropeYemenZaireZimbabweAzores
Slavic
Race
Ancestry
AfghanAfricanAlaska NativeAlaskan AthabascanAlbanianAleutAlsatianAmericanApacheArabArapahoArgentineanArmenianAssyrian/Chaldean/SyriacAustralianAustrianBahamianBangladeshiBarbadianBasqueBelgianBelizeanBermudanBhutaneseBlackfeetBolivianBrazilianBritishBritish West IndianBulgarianCajunCambodianCanadianCape VerdeanCarpatho RusynCelticCentral AmericanCentral American IndianCherokeeCheyenneChickasawChileanChineseChippewaChoctawColombianColvilleComancheCosta RicanCreeCreekCroatianCrowCubanCypriotCzechCzechoslovakianDanishDelawareDominicanDutchDutch West IndianEastern EuropeanEcuadorianEgyptianEnglishEstonianEthiopianEuropeanFijianFilipinoFinnishFrenchFrench American IndianFrench CanadianGermanGerman RussianGhanaianGreekGuamanian/ChamorroGuatemalanGuyaneseHaitianHmongHonduranHopiHoumaHungarianIcelanderIndian (Asian)IndonesianInupiatIranianIraqiIrishIroquoisIsraeliItalianJamaicanJapaneseJordanianKenyanKiowaKoreanLaotianLatvianLebaneseLiberianLithuanianLumbeeLuxembourgerMacedonianMalaysianMalteseMarshalleseMenomineeMexicanMexican American IndianMongolianMoroccanNative HawaiianNavajoNepaleseNew ZealanderNicaraguanNigerianNorthern EuropeanNorwegianOkinawanOsageOttawaPaiutePakistaniPalestinianPanamanianParaguayanPennsylvania GermanPeruvianPimaPolishPortuguesePotawatomiPuebloPuerto RicanPuget Sound SalishRomanianRussianSalvadoranSamoanScandinavianScotch-IrishScottishSeminoleSenegaleseSerbianShoshoneSierra LeoneanSiouxSlavicSlovakSloveneSomaliSouth AfricanSouth AmericanSouth American IndianSoviet UnionSpaniardSpanishSpanish AmericanSpanish American IndianSri LankanSubsaharan AfricanSudaneseSwedishSwissSyrianTaiwaneseThaiTlingit-HaidaTohono O'OdhamTonganTrinidadian and TobagonianTsimshianTurkishU.S. Virgin IslanderUgandanUkrainianUruguayanUteVenezuelanVietnameseWelshWest IndianYakamaYaquiYugoslavianYumanYup'ikZimbabwean
Immigration
NonimmigrantsImmigrantsAfghanistanAfricaAlbaniaArgentinaArmeniaAsiaAustraliaAustriaBahamasBangladeshBarbadosBelarusBelgiumBelizeBoliviaBosnia and HerzegovinaBrazilBulgariaBurma/MyanmarCabo VerdeCambodiaCameroonCanadaCaribbeanCentral AmericaChileChinaColombiaCongoCosta RicaCroatiaCubaCzechoslovakiaDenmarkDominicaDominican RepublicEastern AfricaEastern AsiaEastern EuropeEcuadorEgyptEl SalvadorEnglandEritreaEthiopiaEuropeFijiFranceGermanyGhanaGreeceGrenadaGuatemalaGuyanaHaitiHondurasHong KongHungaryIndiaIndonesiaIranIraqIrelandIsraelItalyJamaicaJapanJordanKazakhstanKenyaKoreaKuwaitLaosLatin AmericaLatviaLebanonLiberiaLithuaniaMalaysiaMexicoMicronesiaMiddle AfricaMoldovaMoroccoNepalNetherlandsNicaraguaNigeriaNorth AmericaNorth MacedoniaNorthern AfricaNorthern EuropeNorwayOceaniaPakistanPanamaPeruPhilippinesPolandPortugalRomaniaRussiaSaudi ArabiaScotlandSenegalSerbiaSierra LeoneSingaporeSomaliaSouth AfricaSouth AmericaSouth Central AsiaSouth Eastern AsiaSouthern EuropeSpainSri LankaSt. Vincent and the GrenadinesSudanSwedenSwitzerlandSyriaTaiwanThailandTrinidad and TobagoTurkeyUgandaUkraineUruguayUzbekistanVenezuelaVietnamWest IndiesWestern AfricaWestern AsiaWestern EuropeYemenZaireZimbabweAzores
Social Comparison
Social Comparison
Income
Poverty
Unemployment
Labor Participation
Family Structure
Vehicle Availability
Education Level
Disability

Social Comparison

Burmese

Slavs

Exceptional
Good
10,002
SOCIAL INDEX
97.5/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
4th/ 347
SOCIAL RANK
7,593
SOCIAL INDEX
73.4/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
111th/ 347
SOCIAL RANK

Slavic Integration in Burmese Communities

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 252,860,939 people shows a poor positive correlation between the proportion of Slavs within Burmese communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.149. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Burmese within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.001% in Slavs. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Burmese corresponds to an increase of 1.5 Slavs.
Burmese Integration in Slavic Communities

Burmese vs Slavic Income

When considering income, the most significant differences between Burmese and Slavic communities in the United States are seen in median household income ($103,145 compared to $86,398, a difference of 19.4%), householder income ages 45 - 64 years ($121,444 compared to $102,629, a difference of 18.3%), and householder income ages 25 - 44 years ($113,701 compared to $96,377, a difference of 18.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of wage/income gap (28.0% compared to 27.4%, a difference of 2.1%), householder income under 25 years ($54,800 compared to $50,563, a difference of 8.4%), and median female earnings ($44,911 compared to $39,613, a difference of 13.4%).
Burmese vs Slavic Income
Income MetricBurmeseSlavic
Per Capita Income
Exceptional
$52,005
Excellent
$45,049
Median Family Income
Exceptional
$123,369
Good
$105,144
Median Household Income
Exceptional
$103,145
Good
$86,398
Median Earnings
Exceptional
$54,559
Excellent
$47,470
Median Male Earnings
Exceptional
$65,236
Excellent
$56,390
Median Female Earnings
Exceptional
$44,911
Average
$39,613
Householder Age | Under 25 years
Exceptional
$54,800
Tragic
$50,563
Householder Age | 25 - 44 years
Exceptional
$113,701
Good
$96,377
Householder Age | 45 - 64 years
Exceptional
$121,444
Good
$102,629
Householder Age | Over 65 years
Exceptional
$71,139
Good
$61,709
Wage/Income Gap
Tragic
28.0%
Tragic
27.4%

Burmese vs Slavic Poverty

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Burmese and Slavic communities in the United States are seen in child poverty under the age of 5 (13.2% compared to 17.0%, a difference of 28.3%), receiving food stamps (8.6% compared to 10.6%, a difference of 22.8%), and child poverty among girls under 16 (13.0% compared to 15.7%, a difference of 20.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of married-couple family poverty (4.3% compared to 4.4%, a difference of 2.9%), seniors poverty over the age of 65 (10.1% compared to 9.8%, a difference of 3.3%), and female poverty among 18-24 year olds (18.9% compared to 19.7%, a difference of 4.1%).
Burmese vs Slavic Poverty
Poverty MetricBurmeseSlavic
Poverty
Exceptional
10.7%
Exceptional
11.5%
Families
Exceptional
7.3%
Exceptional
8.1%
Males
Exceptional
9.7%
Exceptional
10.5%
Females
Exceptional
11.6%
Exceptional
12.5%
Females 18 to 24 years
Exceptional
18.9%
Excellent
19.7%
Females 25 to 34 years
Exceptional
11.2%
Good
13.2%
Children Under 5 years
Exceptional
13.2%
Good
17.0%
Children Under 16 years
Exceptional
12.8%
Excellent
15.4%
Boys Under 16 years
Exceptional
13.0%
Excellent
15.7%
Girls Under 16 years
Exceptional
13.0%
Excellent
15.7%
Single Males
Exceptional
11.7%
Tragic
13.3%
Single Females
Exceptional
18.3%
Average
21.1%
Single Fathers
Exceptional
15.5%
Tragic
17.4%
Single Mothers
Exceptional
26.2%
Fair
29.6%
Married Couples
Exceptional
4.3%
Exceptional
4.4%
Seniors Over 65 years
Exceptional
10.1%
Exceptional
9.8%
Seniors Over 75 years
Excellent
11.7%
Exceptional
11.2%
Receiving Food Stamps
Exceptional
8.6%
Exceptional
10.6%

Burmese vs Slavic Unemployment

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Burmese and Slavic communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among women with children under 6 years (6.5% compared to 7.7%, a difference of 19.4%), unemployment among seniors over 75 years (8.2% compared to 9.2%, a difference of 12.0%), and unemployment among women with children ages 6 to 17 years (8.0% compared to 8.7%, a difference of 9.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment (4.9% compared to 4.9%, a difference of 0.32%), unemployment among seniors over 65 years (5.0% compared to 5.0%, a difference of 0.86%), and unemployment among ages 65 to 74 years (5.2% compared to 5.2%, a difference of 0.87%).
Burmese vs Slavic Unemployment
Unemployment MetricBurmeseSlavic
Unemployment
Exceptional
4.9%
Exceptional
4.9%
Males
Exceptional
4.9%
Exceptional
5.1%
Females
Exceptional
5.0%
Exceptional
4.9%
Youth < 25
Excellent
11.3%
Exceptional
11.2%
Age | 16 to 19 years
Exceptional
17.0%
Exceptional
16.7%
Age | 20 to 24 years
Excellent
10.2%
Exceptional
10.0%
Age | 25 to 29 years
Exceptional
6.2%
Good
6.5%
Age | 30 to 34 years
Exceptional
5.1%
Fair
5.5%
Age | 35 to 44 years
Exceptional
4.3%
Good
4.6%
Age | 45 to 54 years
Exceptional
4.2%
Exceptional
4.3%
Age | 55 to 59 years
Exceptional
4.5%
Excellent
4.7%
Age | 60 to 64 years
Excellent
4.8%
Exceptional
4.6%
Age | 65 to 74 years
Exceptional
5.2%
Exceptional
5.2%
Seniors > 65
Exceptional
5.0%
Exceptional
5.0%
Seniors > 75
Exceptional
8.2%
Tragic
9.2%
Women w/ Children < 6
Exceptional
6.5%
Fair
7.7%
Women w/ Children 6 to 17
Exceptional
8.0%
Exceptional
8.7%
Women w/ Children < 18
Exceptional
4.9%
Excellent
5.2%

Burmese vs Slavic Labor Participation

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Burmese and Slavic communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (34.5% compared to 40.4%, a difference of 17.1%), in labor force | age 20-24 (73.6% compared to 76.9%, a difference of 4.5%), and in labor force | age > 16 (66.2% compared to 64.6%, a difference of 2.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 35-44 (84.7% compared to 84.7%, a difference of 0.020%), in labor force | age 25-29 (85.1% compared to 85.1%, a difference of 0.080%), and in labor force | age 30-34 (85.3% compared to 85.0%, a difference of 0.28%).
Burmese vs Slavic Labor Participation
Labor Participation MetricBurmeseSlavic
In Labor Force | Age > 16
Exceptional
66.2%
Tragic
64.6%
In Labor Force | Age 20-64
Exceptional
80.3%
Average
79.6%
In Labor Force | Age 16-19
Tragic
34.5%
Exceptional
40.4%
In Labor Force | Age 20-24
Tragic
73.6%
Exceptional
76.9%
In Labor Force | Age 25-29
Exceptional
85.1%
Exceptional
85.1%
In Labor Force | Age 30-34
Exceptional
85.3%
Exceptional
85.0%
In Labor Force | Age 35-44
Exceptional
84.7%
Exceptional
84.7%
In Labor Force | Age 45-54
Exceptional
83.6%
Good
82.9%

Burmese vs Slavic Family Structure

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Burmese and Slavic communities in the United States are seen in births to unmarried women (26.4% compared to 31.6%, a difference of 19.9%), divorced or separated (10.7% compared to 12.2%, a difference of 14.1%), and single mother households (5.3% compared to 5.9%, a difference of 11.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of currently married (48.9% compared to 48.4%, a difference of 1.2%), family households (65.7% compared to 64.0%, a difference of 2.8%), and average family size (3.22 compared to 3.13, a difference of 2.8%).
Burmese vs Slavic Family Structure
Family Structure MetricBurmeseSlavic
Family Households
Exceptional
65.7%
Poor
64.0%
Family Households with Children
Exceptional
28.5%
Tragic
26.8%
Married-couple Households
Exceptional
49.8%
Exceptional
47.8%
Average Family Size
Fair
3.22
Tragic
3.13
Single Father Households
Exceptional
2.0%
Excellent
2.2%
Single Mother Households
Exceptional
5.3%
Exceptional
5.9%
Currently Married
Exceptional
48.9%
Exceptional
48.4%
Divorced or Separated
Exceptional
10.7%
Poor
12.2%
Births to Unmarried Women
Exceptional
26.4%
Average
31.6%

Burmese vs Slavic Vehicle Availability

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Burmese and Slavic communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (9.7% compared to 9.0%, a difference of 8.1%), 4 or more vehicles in household (6.8% compared to 6.6%, a difference of 4.0%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (20.6% compared to 20.4%, a difference of 1.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 2 or more vehicles in household (57.8% compared to 57.8%, a difference of 0.020%), 1 or more vehicles in household (90.4% compared to 91.2%, a difference of 0.85%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (20.6% compared to 20.4%, a difference of 1.2%).
Burmese vs Slavic Vehicle Availability
Vehicle Availability MetricBurmeseSlavic
No Vehicles Available
Excellent
9.7%
Exceptional
9.0%
1+ Vehicles Available
Excellent
90.4%
Exceptional
91.2%
2+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
57.8%
Exceptional
57.8%
3+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
20.6%
Exceptional
20.4%
4+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
6.8%
Excellent
6.6%

Burmese vs Slavic Education Level

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Burmese and Slavic communities in the United States are seen in doctorate degree (2.6% compared to 1.9%, a difference of 38.4%), professional degree (6.1% compared to 4.5%, a difference of 35.1%), and master's degree (19.7% compared to 15.5%, a difference of 27.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 12th grade, no diploma (92.6% compared to 92.8%, a difference of 0.18%), high school diploma (90.8% compared to 91.0%, a difference of 0.25%), and nursery school (98.1% compared to 98.4%, a difference of 0.34%).
Burmese vs Slavic Education Level
Education Level MetricBurmeseSlavic
No Schooling Completed
Excellent
1.9%
Exceptional
1.7%
Nursery School
Excellent
98.1%
Exceptional
98.4%
Kindergarten
Excellent
98.1%
Exceptional
98.4%
1st Grade
Excellent
98.0%
Exceptional
98.4%
2nd Grade
Excellent
98.0%
Exceptional
98.3%
3rd Grade
Good
97.9%
Exceptional
98.3%
4th Grade
Excellent
97.7%
Exceptional
98.1%
5th Grade
Excellent
97.5%
Exceptional
98.0%
6th Grade
Excellent
97.3%
Exceptional
97.8%
7th Grade
Excellent
96.3%
Exceptional
97.1%
8th Grade
Exceptional
96.1%
Exceptional
96.8%
9th Grade
Exceptional
95.4%
Exceptional
96.1%
10th Grade
Exceptional
94.5%
Exceptional
95.2%
11th Grade
Exceptional
93.6%
Exceptional
94.1%
12th Grade, No Diploma
Exceptional
92.6%
Exceptional
92.8%
High School Diploma
Exceptional
90.8%
Exceptional
91.0%
GED/Equivalency
Exceptional
88.3%
Exceptional
87.7%
College, Under 1 year
Exceptional
71.9%
Excellent
66.7%
College, 1 year or more
Exceptional
66.7%
Excellent
60.6%
Associate's Degree
Exceptional
54.6%
Excellent
47.6%
Bachelor's Degree
Exceptional
46.9%
Good
38.9%
Master's Degree
Exceptional
19.7%
Good
15.5%
Professional Degree
Exceptional
6.1%
Good
4.5%
Doctorate Degree
Exceptional
2.6%
Good
1.9%

Burmese vs Slavic Disability

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Burmese and Slavic communities in the United States are seen in disability age 35 to 64 (9.2% compared to 11.7%, a difference of 26.5%), disability age under 5 (1.1% compared to 1.4%, a difference of 25.4%), and disability age 5 to 17 (4.8% compared to 5.9%, a difference of 24.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of cognitive disability (16.7% compared to 16.7%, a difference of 0.0%), disability age over 75 (45.9% compared to 46.1%, a difference of 0.49%), and self-care disability (2.3% compared to 2.5%, a difference of 10.0%).
Burmese vs Slavic Disability
Disability MetricBurmeseSlavic
Disability
Exceptional
10.4%
Tragic
12.4%
Males
Exceptional
10.0%
Tragic
12.2%
Females
Exceptional
10.7%
Tragic
12.6%
Age | Under 5 years
Exceptional
1.1%
Tragic
1.4%
Age | 5 to 17 years
Exceptional
4.8%
Tragic
5.9%
Age | 18 to 34 years
Exceptional
6.0%
Tragic
7.4%
Age | 35 to 64 years
Exceptional
9.2%
Poor
11.7%
Age | 65 to 74 years
Exceptional
20.6%
Good
23.0%
Age | Over 75 years
Exceptional
45.9%
Exceptional
46.1%
Vision
Exceptional
1.8%
Average
2.2%
Hearing
Exceptional
2.8%
Tragic
3.4%
Cognitive
Exceptional
16.7%
Exceptional
16.7%
Ambulatory
Exceptional
5.3%
Tragic
6.4%
Self-Care
Exceptional
2.3%
Fair
2.5%