Cajun vs Zimbabwean Community Comparison

COMPARE

Cajun
Race
Ancestry
AfghanAfricanAlaska NativeAlaskan AthabascanAlbanianAleutAmericanApacheArabArgentineanArmenianAssyrian/Chaldean/SyriacAustralianAustrianBahamianBangladeshiBarbadianBasqueBelgianBelizeanBermudanBhutaneseBlackfeetBolivianBrazilianBritishBritish West IndianBulgarianBurmeseCajunCambodianCanadianCape VerdeanCarpatho RusynCelticCentral AmericanCentral American IndianCherokeeCheyenneChickasawChileanChineseChippewaChoctawColombianComancheCosta RicanCreeCreekCroatianCubanCypriotCzechCzechoslovakianDanishDelawareDominicanDutchDutch West IndianEastern EuropeanEcuadorianEgyptianEnglishEstonianEthiopianEuropeanFijianFilipinoFinnishFrenchFrench American IndianFrench CanadianGermanGerman RussianGhanaianGreekGuamanian/ChamorroGuatemalanGuyaneseHaitianHmongHonduranHoumaHungarianIcelanderIndian (Asian)IndonesianInupiatIranianIraqiIrishIroquoisIsraeliItalianJamaicanJapaneseJordanianKenyanKiowaKoreanLaotianLatvianLebaneseLiberianLithuanianLumbeeLuxembourgerMacedonianMalaysianMalteseMarshalleseMexicanMexican American IndianMongolianMoroccanNative HawaiianNavajoNepaleseNew ZealanderNicaraguanNigerianNorthern EuropeanNorwegianOkinawanOsageOttawaPakistaniPalestinianPanamanianParaguayanPennsylvania GermanPeruvianPolishPortuguesePotawatomiPuebloPuerto RicanRomanianRussianSalvadoranSamoanScandinavianScotch-IrishScottishSeminoleSenegaleseSerbianSierra LeoneanSiouxSlavicSlovakSloveneSomaliSouth AfricanSouth AmericanSouth American IndianSoviet UnionSpaniardSpanishSpanish AmericanSpanish American IndianSri LankanSubsaharan AfricanSudaneseSwedishSwissSyrianTaiwaneseThaiTlingit-HaidaTohono O'OdhamTonganTrinidadian and TobagonianTsimshianTurkishU.S. Virgin IslanderUgandanUkrainianUruguayanUteVenezuelanVietnameseWelshWest IndianYakamaYaquiYugoslavianYup'ik
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
Zimbabwean
Race
Ancestry
AfghanAfricanAlaska NativeAlaskan AthabascanAlbanianAleutAlsatianAmericanApacheArabArapahoArgentineanArmenianAssyrian/Chaldean/SyriacAustralianAustrianBahamianBangladeshiBarbadianBasqueBelgianBelizeanBermudanBhutaneseBlackfeetBolivianBrazilianBritishBritish West IndianBulgarianBurmeseCambodianCanadianCape 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

Cajuns

Zimbabweans

Poor
Exceptional
2,029
SOCIAL INDEX
17.8/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
275th/ 347
SOCIAL RANK
9,358
SOCIAL INDEX
91.0/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
18th/ 347
SOCIAL RANK

Zimbabwean Integration in Cajun Communities

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 50,142,818 people shows a significant positive correlation between the proportion of Zimbabweans within Cajun communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.691. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Cajuns within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.041% in Zimbabweans. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Cajuns corresponds to an increase of 41.0 Zimbabweans.
Cajun Integration in Zimbabwean Communities

Cajun vs Zimbabwean Income

When considering income, the most significant differences between Cajun and Zimbabwean communities in the United States are seen in wage/income gap (33.9% compared to 26.3%, a difference of 28.8%), householder income ages 45 - 64 years ($83,015 compared to $106,849, a difference of 28.7%), and median household income ($70,605 compared to $90,618, a difference of 28.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of median male earnings ($52,325 compared to $56,302, a difference of 7.6%), householder income under 25 years ($45,338 compared to $51,259, a difference of 13.1%), and median earnings ($42,189 compared to $48,229, a difference of 14.3%).
Cajun vs Zimbabwean Income
Income MetricCajunZimbabwean
Per Capita Income
Tragic
$37,527
Exceptional
$45,804
Median Family Income
Tragic
$87,157
Exceptional
$110,011
Median Household Income
Tragic
$70,605
Exceptional
$90,618
Median Earnings
Tragic
$42,189
Exceptional
$48,229
Median Male Earnings
Poor
$52,325
Excellent
$56,302
Median Female Earnings
Tragic
$34,034
Exceptional
$40,798
Householder Age | Under 25 years
Tragic
$45,338
Tragic
$51,259
Householder Age | 25 - 44 years
Tragic
$82,393
Exceptional
$98,586
Householder Age | 45 - 64 years
Tragic
$83,015
Exceptional
$106,849
Householder Age | Over 65 years
Tragic
$51,397
Exceptional
$65,854
Wage/Income Gap
Tragic
33.9%
Fair
26.3%

Cajun vs Zimbabwean Poverty

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Cajun and Zimbabwean communities in the United States are seen in female poverty among 25-34 year olds (19.9% compared to 11.7%, a difference of 71.0%), child poverty under the age of 5 (24.1% compared to 15.2%, a difference of 58.8%), and single female poverty (30.6% compared to 19.5%, a difference of 57.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of seniors poverty over the age of 65 (11.9% compared to 9.6%, a difference of 23.6%), seniors poverty over the age of 75 (14.0% compared to 11.2%, a difference of 25.4%), and female poverty among 18-24 year olds (25.7% compared to 20.4%, a difference of 25.8%).
Cajun vs Zimbabwean Poverty
Poverty MetricCajunZimbabwean
Poverty
Tragic
15.7%
Exceptional
11.3%
Families
Tragic
11.9%
Exceptional
7.8%
Males
Tragic
13.9%
Exceptional
10.2%
Females
Tragic
17.5%
Exceptional
12.3%
Females 18 to 24 years
Tragic
25.7%
Fair
20.4%
Females 25 to 34 years
Tragic
19.9%
Exceptional
11.7%
Children Under 5 years
Tragic
24.1%
Exceptional
15.2%
Children Under 16 years
Tragic
22.1%
Exceptional
14.2%
Boys Under 16 years
Tragic
22.2%
Exceptional
14.3%
Girls Under 16 years
Tragic
22.6%
Exceptional
14.4%
Single Males
Tragic
19.1%
Poor
13.1%
Single Females
Tragic
30.6%
Exceptional
19.5%
Single Fathers
Tragic
23.1%
Exceptional
15.6%
Single Mothers
Tragic
40.3%
Exceptional
27.9%
Married Couples
Tragic
5.6%
Exceptional
4.1%
Seniors Over 65 years
Tragic
11.9%
Exceptional
9.6%
Seniors Over 75 years
Tragic
14.0%
Exceptional
11.2%
Receiving Food Stamps
Tragic
13.7%
Exceptional
9.5%

Cajun vs Zimbabwean Unemployment

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Cajun and Zimbabwean communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among seniors over 75 years (12.5% compared to 8.7%, a difference of 43.1%), unemployment among ages 30 to 34 years (6.7% compared to 4.8%, a difference of 37.9%), and unemployment among ages 20 to 24 years (12.0% compared to 9.2%, a difference of 30.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among seniors over 65 years (5.2% compared to 5.6%, a difference of 6.0%), unemployment among ages 65 to 74 years (5.5% compared to 5.9%, a difference of 7.1%), and unemployment among ages 60 to 64 years (4.9% compared to 4.5%, a difference of 10.5%).
Cajun vs Zimbabwean Unemployment
Unemployment MetricCajunZimbabwean
Unemployment
Tragic
5.6%
Exceptional
4.8%
Males
Tragic
5.8%
Exceptional
4.8%
Females
Tragic
5.7%
Exceptional
4.8%
Youth < 25
Tragic
13.2%
Exceptional
10.2%
Age | 16 to 19 years
Tragic
19.6%
Exceptional
15.4%
Age | 20 to 24 years
Tragic
12.0%
Exceptional
9.2%
Age | 25 to 29 years
Tragic
8.0%
Exceptional
6.4%
Age | 30 to 34 years
Tragic
6.7%
Exceptional
4.8%
Age | 35 to 44 years
Tragic
5.3%
Exceptional
4.3%
Age | 45 to 54 years
Tragic
5.0%
Exceptional
4.2%
Age | 55 to 59 years
Tragic
5.3%
Exceptional
4.2%
Age | 60 to 64 years
Poor
4.9%
Exceptional
4.5%
Age | 65 to 74 years
Tragic
5.5%
Tragic
5.9%
Seniors > 65
Tragic
5.2%
Tragic
5.6%
Seniors > 75
Tragic
12.5%
Average
8.7%
Women w/ Children < 6
Tragic
9.2%
Exceptional
7.3%
Women w/ Children 6 to 17
Tragic
10.8%
Exceptional
8.6%
Women w/ Children < 18
Tragic
6.2%
Exceptional
5.1%

Cajun vs Zimbabwean Labor Participation

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Cajun and Zimbabwean communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age > 16 (61.8% compared to 67.3%, a difference of 8.9%), in labor force | age 45-54 (78.1% compared to 84.0%, a difference of 7.5%), and in labor force | age 20-64 (75.5% compared to 81.0%, a difference of 7.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 20-24 (75.1% compared to 75.6%, a difference of 0.72%), in labor force | age 25-29 (82.5% compared to 84.5%, a difference of 2.4%), and in labor force | age 16-19 (37.8% compared to 38.7%, a difference of 2.5%).
Cajun vs Zimbabwean Labor Participation
Labor Participation MetricCajunZimbabwean
In Labor Force | Age > 16
Tragic
61.8%
Exceptional
67.3%
In Labor Force | Age 20-64
Tragic
75.5%
Exceptional
81.0%
In Labor Force | Age 16-19
Exceptional
37.8%
Exceptional
38.7%
In Labor Force | Age 20-24
Average
75.1%
Excellent
75.6%
In Labor Force | Age 25-29
Tragic
82.5%
Fair
84.5%
In Labor Force | Age 30-34
Tragic
82.0%
Exceptional
85.6%
In Labor Force | Age 35-44
Tragic
81.5%
Exceptional
86.1%
In Labor Force | Age 45-54
Tragic
78.1%
Exceptional
84.0%

Cajun vs Zimbabwean Family Structure

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Cajun and Zimbabwean communities in the United States are seen in births to unmarried women (41.0% compared to 28.7%, a difference of 42.8%), single mother households (7.3% compared to 6.1%, a difference of 21.0%), and divorced or separated (13.4% compared to 11.6%, a difference of 15.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of currently married (47.1% compared to 47.0%, a difference of 0.24%), family households with children (27.7% compared to 27.9%, a difference of 0.61%), and average family size (3.17 compared to 3.20, a difference of 0.82%).
Cajun vs Zimbabwean Family Structure
Family Structure MetricCajunZimbabwean
Family Households
Excellent
64.8%
Fair
64.1%
Family Households with Children
Excellent
27.7%
Exceptional
27.9%
Married-couple Households
Average
46.4%
Excellent
47.4%
Average Family Size
Tragic
3.17
Poor
3.20
Single Father Households
Tragic
2.5%
Exceptional
2.2%
Single Mother Households
Tragic
7.3%
Excellent
6.1%
Currently Married
Good
47.1%
Good
47.0%
Divorced or Separated
Tragic
13.4%
Exceptional
11.6%
Births to Unmarried Women
Tragic
41.0%
Exceptional
28.7%

Cajun vs Zimbabwean Vehicle Availability

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Cajun and Zimbabwean communities in the United States are seen in 4 or more vehicles in household (6.0% compared to 6.4%, a difference of 8.1%), no vehicles in household (8.4% compared to 9.0%, a difference of 7.2%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (19.3% compared to 20.3%, a difference of 5.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 2 or more vehicles in household (57.7% compared to 57.2%, a difference of 0.72%), 1 or more vehicles in household (91.7% compared to 91.0%, a difference of 0.74%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (19.3% compared to 20.3%, a difference of 5.0%).
Cajun vs Zimbabwean Vehicle Availability
Vehicle Availability MetricCajunZimbabwean
No Vehicles Available
Exceptional
8.4%
Exceptional
9.0%
1+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
91.7%
Exceptional
91.0%
2+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
57.7%
Exceptional
57.2%
3+ Vehicles Available
Fair
19.3%
Excellent
20.3%
4+ Vehicles Available
Tragic
6.0%
Good
6.4%

Cajun vs Zimbabwean Education Level

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Cajun and Zimbabwean communities in the United States are seen in master's degree (11.0% compared to 17.7%, a difference of 61.6%), doctorate degree (1.5% compared to 2.3%, a difference of 56.6%), and professional degree (3.4% compared to 5.2%, a difference of 54.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 7th grade (96.8% compared to 96.8%, a difference of 0.030%), nursery school (98.4% compared to 98.3%, a difference of 0.050%), and kindergarten (98.3% compared to 98.3%, a difference of 0.060%).
Cajun vs Zimbabwean Education Level
Education Level MetricCajunZimbabwean
No Schooling Completed
Exceptional
1.7%
Exceptional
1.7%
Nursery School
Exceptional
98.4%
Exceptional
98.3%
Kindergarten
Exceptional
98.3%
Exceptional
98.3%
1st Grade
Exceptional
98.3%
Exceptional
98.3%
2nd Grade
Exceptional
98.3%
Exceptional
98.2%
3rd Grade
Exceptional
98.2%
Exceptional
98.1%
4th Grade
Exceptional
98.0%
Exceptional
97.9%
5th Grade
Exceptional
97.9%
Exceptional
97.8%
6th Grade
Exceptional
97.6%
Exceptional
97.6%
7th Grade
Exceptional
96.8%
Exceptional
96.8%
8th Grade
Exceptional
96.3%
Exceptional
96.5%
9th Grade
Good
95.1%
Exceptional
95.9%
10th Grade
Poor
93.4%
Exceptional
94.9%
11th Grade
Tragic
91.4%
Exceptional
93.9%
12th Grade, No Diploma
Tragic
89.1%
Exceptional
92.7%
High School Diploma
Tragic
87.3%
Exceptional
91.1%
GED/Equivalency
Tragic
82.4%
Exceptional
88.0%
College, Under 1 year
Tragic
57.3%
Exceptional
69.9%
College, 1 year or more
Tragic
51.2%
Exceptional
64.2%
Associate's Degree
Tragic
37.4%
Exceptional
51.3%
Bachelor's Degree
Tragic
29.6%
Exceptional
43.3%
Master's Degree
Tragic
11.0%
Exceptional
17.7%
Professional Degree
Tragic
3.4%
Exceptional
5.2%
Doctorate Degree
Tragic
1.5%
Exceptional
2.3%

Cajun vs Zimbabwean Disability

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Cajun and Zimbabwean communities in the United States are seen in vision disability (3.1% compared to 2.0%, a difference of 55.9%), disability age 35 to 64 (15.3% compared to 10.4%, a difference of 46.8%), and ambulatory disability (7.8% compared to 5.4%, a difference of 44.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of cognitive disability (17.8% compared to 17.6%, a difference of 1.0%), disability age over 75 (50.7% compared to 48.1%, a difference of 5.4%), and disability age 18 to 34 (8.2% compared to 6.5%, a difference of 26.2%).
Cajun vs Zimbabwean Disability
Disability MetricCajunZimbabwean
Disability
Tragic
14.6%
Exceptional
10.9%
Males
Tragic
14.4%
Exceptional
10.6%
Females
Tragic
14.9%
Exceptional
11.3%
Age | Under 5 years
Tragic
1.6%
Exceptional
1.2%
Age | 5 to 17 years
Tragic
7.2%
Good
5.5%
Age | 18 to 34 years
Tragic
8.2%
Good
6.5%
Age | 35 to 64 years
Tragic
15.3%
Exceptional
10.4%
Age | 65 to 74 years
Tragic
27.9%
Exceptional
21.5%
Age | Over 75 years
Tragic
50.7%
Tragic
48.1%
Vision
Tragic
3.1%
Exceptional
2.0%
Hearing
Tragic
3.9%
Excellent
2.8%
Cognitive
Tragic
17.8%
Tragic
17.6%
Ambulatory
Tragic
7.8%
Exceptional
5.4%
Self-Care
Tragic
2.9%
Exceptional
2.2%