Chickasaw vs Chinese Community Comparison
COMPARE
Chickasaw
Chinese
Social Comparison
Social Comparison
Chickasaw
Chinese
3,663
SOCIAL INDEX
34.2/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
212th/ 347
SOCIAL RANK
9,296
SOCIAL INDEX
90.4/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
23rd/ 347
SOCIAL RANK
Chinese Integration in Chickasaw Communities
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 47,187,635 people shows a slight negative correlation between the proportion of Chinese within Chickasaw communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of -0.067. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Chickasaw within a typical geography, there is a decrease of 0.025% in Chinese. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Chickasaw corresponds to a decrease of 25.1 Chinese.
Chickasaw vs Chinese Income
When considering income, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in householder income over 65 years ($53,732 compared to $77,465, a difference of 44.2%), householder income ages 45 - 64 years ($82,193 compared to $116,156, a difference of 41.3%), and median household income ($70,005 compared to $98,496, a difference of 40.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of wage/income gap (27.2% compared to 25.9%, a difference of 4.9%), median male earnings ($47,832 compared to $56,872, a difference of 18.9%), and median earnings ($40,672 compared to $48,836, a difference of 20.1%).
Income Metric | Chickasaw | Chinese |
Per Capita Income | Tragic $36,475 | Exceptional $46,098 |
Median Family Income | Tragic $85,356 | Exceptional $116,188 |
Median Household Income | Tragic $70,005 | Exceptional $98,496 |
Median Earnings | Tragic $40,672 | Exceptional $48,836 |
Median Male Earnings | Tragic $47,832 | Exceptional $56,872 |
Median Female Earnings | Tragic $34,414 | Exceptional $41,461 |
Householder Age | Under 25 years | Tragic $44,763 | Exceptional $58,162 |
Householder Age | 25 - 44 years | Tragic $77,929 | Exceptional $104,264 |
Householder Age | 45 - 64 years | Tragic $82,193 | Exceptional $116,156 |
Householder Age | Over 65 years | Tragic $53,732 | Exceptional $77,465 |
Wage/Income Gap | Tragic 27.2% | Average 25.9% |
Chickasaw vs Chinese Poverty
When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in child poverty under the age of 5 (21.8% compared to 13.1%, a difference of 67.1%), child poverty among boys under 16 (19.8% compared to 11.9%, a difference of 66.9%), and family poverty (10.8% compared to 6.5%, a difference of 66.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of single father poverty (19.0% compared to 15.4%, a difference of 23.1%), seniors poverty over the age of 65 (10.7% compared to 8.3%, a difference of 28.2%), and seniors poverty over the age of 75 (11.6% compared to 9.1%, a difference of 28.3%).
Poverty Metric | Chickasaw | Chinese |
Poverty | Tragic 14.7% | Exceptional 9.5% |
Families | Tragic 10.8% | Exceptional 6.5% |
Males | Tragic 13.5% | Exceptional 8.7% |
Females | Tragic 15.9% | Exceptional 10.4% |
Females 18 to 24 years | Tragic 24.5% | Exceptional 16.2% |
Females 25 to 34 years | Tragic 17.0% | Exceptional 11.0% |
Children Under 5 years | Tragic 21.8% | Exceptional 13.1% |
Children Under 16 years | Tragic 19.5% | Exceptional 11.9% |
Boys Under 16 years | Tragic 19.8% | Exceptional 11.9% |
Girls Under 16 years | Tragic 19.6% | Exceptional 12.3% |
Single Males | Tragic 16.3% | Exceptional 11.0% |
Single Females | Tragic 26.3% | Exceptional 16.1% |
Single Fathers | Tragic 19.0% | Exceptional 15.4% |
Single Mothers | Tragic 34.4% | Exceptional 24.6% |
Married Couples | Tragic 5.8% | Exceptional 3.6% |
Seniors Over 65 years | Good 10.7% | Exceptional 8.3% |
Seniors Over 75 years | Exceptional 11.6% | Exceptional 9.1% |
Receiving Food Stamps | Tragic 13.1% | Exceptional 9.8% |
Chickasaw vs Chinese Unemployment
When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among women with children under 6 years (9.0% compared to 6.8%, a difference of 31.8%), unemployment among seniors over 75 years (7.3% compared to 5.9%, a difference of 24.3%), and unemployment among ages 30 to 34 years (6.2% compared to 5.1%, a difference of 21.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among ages 16 to 19 years (16.7% compared to 16.0%, a difference of 3.9%), unemployment among youth under 25 years (11.2% compared to 10.7%, a difference of 4.2%), and unemployment among seniors over 65 years (4.4% compared to 4.2%, a difference of 5.0%).
Unemployment Metric | Chickasaw | Chinese |
Unemployment | Exceptional 5.0% | Exceptional 4.7% |
Males | Excellent 5.2% | Exceptional 4.9% |
Females | Excellent 5.1% | Exceptional 4.5% |
Youth < 25 | Exceptional 11.2% | Exceptional 10.7% |
Age | 16 to 19 years | Exceptional 16.7% | Exceptional 16.0% |
Age | 20 to 24 years | Exceptional 9.9% | Exceptional 9.4% |
Age | 25 to 29 years | Fair 6.7% | Exceptional 6.1% |
Age | 30 to 34 years | Tragic 6.2% | Exceptional 5.1% |
Age | 35 to 44 years | Tragic 4.9% | Exceptional 4.3% |
Age | 45 to 54 years | Exceptional 4.2% | Exceptional 4.0% |
Age | 55 to 59 years | Good 4.8% | Exceptional 4.4% |
Age | 60 to 64 years | Exceptional 4.3% | Exceptional 4.0% |
Age | 65 to 74 years | Exceptional 4.7% | Exceptional 4.4% |
Seniors > 65 | Exceptional 4.4% | Exceptional 4.2% |
Seniors > 75 | Exceptional 7.3% | Exceptional 5.9% |
Women w/ Children < 6 | Tragic 9.0% | Exceptional 6.8% |
Women w/ Children 6 to 17 | Exceptional 8.6% | Tragic 9.3% |
Women w/ Children < 18 | Good 5.4% | Exceptional 4.9% |
Chickasaw vs Chinese Labor Participation
When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 45-54 (79.0% compared to 84.1%, a difference of 6.5%), in labor force | age 20-64 (76.2% compared to 80.7%, a difference of 5.9%), and in labor force | age 35-44 (80.9% compared to 85.1%, a difference of 5.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 16-19 (38.3% compared to 38.6%, a difference of 0.73%), in labor force | age 25-29 (81.9% compared to 84.3%, a difference of 3.0%), and in labor force | age 20-24 (74.5% compared to 77.3%, a difference of 3.8%).
Labor Participation Metric | Chickasaw | Chinese |
In Labor Force | Age > 16 | Tragic 62.3% | Tragic 64.7% |
In Labor Force | Age 20-64 | Tragic 76.2% | Exceptional 80.7% |
In Labor Force | Age 16-19 | Exceptional 38.3% | Exceptional 38.6% |
In Labor Force | Age 20-24 | Poor 74.5% | Exceptional 77.3% |
In Labor Force | Age 25-29 | Tragic 81.9% | Poor 84.3% |
In Labor Force | Age 30-34 | Tragic 81.9% | Excellent 85.0% |
In Labor Force | Age 35-44 | Tragic 80.9% | Exceptional 85.1% |
In Labor Force | Age 45-54 | Tragic 79.0% | Exceptional 84.1% |
Chickasaw vs Chinese Family Structure
When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in single father households (2.8% compared to 2.0%, a difference of 39.5%), single mother households (7.0% compared to 5.2%, a difference of 36.4%), and divorced or separated (14.2% compared to 11.2%, a difference of 27.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of average family size (3.19 compared to 3.34, a difference of 4.8%), family households (64.4% compared to 68.1%, a difference of 5.8%), and currently married (46.6% compared to 49.5%, a difference of 6.2%).
Family Structure Metric | Chickasaw | Chinese |
Family Households | Good 64.4% | Exceptional 68.1% |
Family Households with Children | Exceptional 28.2% | Tragic 26.0% |
Married-couple Households | Fair 45.9% | Exceptional 50.4% |
Average Family Size | Tragic 3.19 | Exceptional 3.34 |
Single Father Households | Tragic 2.8% | Exceptional 2.0% |
Single Mother Households | Tragic 7.0% | Exceptional 5.2% |
Currently Married | Average 46.6% | Exceptional 49.5% |
Divorced or Separated | Tragic 14.2% | Exceptional 11.2% |
Births to Unmarried Women | Tragic 36.3% | Excellent 30.2% |
Chickasaw vs Chinese Vehicle Availability
When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in 4 or more vehicles in household (7.4% compared to 8.8%, a difference of 19.0%), 3 or more vehicles in household (22.2% compared to 23.9%, a difference of 7.5%), and no vehicles in household (7.9% compared to 8.2%, a difference of 4.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (92.3% compared to 91.9%, a difference of 0.45%), 2 or more vehicles in household (59.0% compared to 60.1%, a difference of 1.9%), and no vehicles in household (7.9% compared to 8.2%, a difference of 4.6%).
Vehicle Availability Metric | Chickasaw | Chinese |
No Vehicles Available | Exceptional 7.9% | Exceptional 8.2% |
1+ Vehicles Available | Exceptional 92.3% | Exceptional 91.9% |
2+ Vehicles Available | Exceptional 59.0% | Exceptional 60.1% |
3+ Vehicles Available | Exceptional 22.2% | Exceptional 23.9% |
4+ Vehicles Available | Exceptional 7.4% | Exceptional 8.8% |
Chickasaw vs Chinese Education Level
When considering education level, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in professional degree (3.4% compared to 4.5%, a difference of 32.8%), master's degree (11.4% compared to 14.6%, a difference of 27.6%), and bachelor's degree (30.4% compared to 38.5%, a difference of 26.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1st grade (98.3% compared to 98.5%, a difference of 0.17%), nursery school (98.4% compared to 98.6%, a difference of 0.18%), and kindergarten (98.4% compared to 98.5%, a difference of 0.18%).
Education Level Metric | Chickasaw | Chinese |
No Schooling Completed | Exceptional 1.7% | Exceptional 1.5% |
Nursery School | Exceptional 98.4% | Exceptional 98.6% |
Kindergarten | Exceptional 98.4% | Exceptional 98.5% |
1st Grade | Exceptional 98.3% | Exceptional 98.5% |
2nd Grade | Exceptional 98.3% | Exceptional 98.5% |
3rd Grade | Exceptional 98.2% | Exceptional 98.4% |
4th Grade | Exceptional 98.0% | Exceptional 98.3% |
5th Grade | Exceptional 97.9% | Exceptional 98.1% |
6th Grade | Exceptional 97.6% | Exceptional 97.9% |
7th Grade | Exceptional 96.7% | Exceptional 97.1% |
8th Grade | Exceptional 96.4% | Exceptional 96.9% |
9th Grade | Exceptional 95.5% | Exceptional 96.3% |
10th Grade | Excellent 94.1% | Exceptional 95.5% |
11th Grade | Fair 92.3% | Exceptional 94.6% |
12th Grade, No Diploma | Tragic 90.3% | Exceptional 93.6% |
High School Diploma | Poor 88.4% | Exceptional 92.0% |
GED/Equivalency | Tragic 83.8% | Exceptional 89.0% |
College, Under 1 year | Tragic 60.4% | Exceptional 68.3% |
College, 1 year or more | Tragic 53.3% | Exceptional 62.2% |
Associate's Degree | Tragic 38.6% | Exceptional 48.5% |
Bachelor's Degree | Tragic 30.4% | Good 38.5% |
Master's Degree | Tragic 11.4% | Fair 14.6% |
Professional Degree | Tragic 3.4% | Average 4.5% |
Doctorate Degree | Tragic 1.5% | Fair 1.8% |
Chickasaw vs Chinese Disability
When considering disability, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in disability age 35 to 64 (16.1% compared to 10.3%, a difference of 56.4%), vision disability (3.2% compared to 2.0%, a difference of 55.4%), and disability age under 5 (1.7% compared to 1.1%, a difference of 52.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of disability age over 75 (51.2% compared to 48.7%, a difference of 5.1%), self-care disability (2.9% compared to 2.6%, a difference of 11.3%), and cognitive disability (18.5% compared to 15.9%, a difference of 16.1%).
Disability Metric | Chickasaw | Chinese |
Disability | Tragic 15.2% | Tragic 12.2% |
Males | Tragic 15.1% | Tragic 12.1% |
Females | Tragic 15.2% | Fair 12.3% |
Age | Under 5 years | Tragic 1.7% | Exceptional 1.1% |
Age | 5 to 17 years | Tragic 6.8% | Exceptional 4.7% |
Age | 18 to 34 years | Tragic 9.0% | Exceptional 6.3% |
Age | 35 to 64 years | Tragic 16.1% | Exceptional 10.3% |
Age | 65 to 74 years | Tragic 30.2% | Exceptional 21.7% |
Age | Over 75 years | Tragic 51.2% | Tragic 48.7% |
Vision | Tragic 3.2% | Exceptional 2.0% |
Hearing | Tragic 4.5% | Tragic 3.7% |
Cognitive | Tragic 18.5% | Exceptional 15.9% |
Ambulatory | Tragic 8.0% | Tragic 6.5% |
Self-Care | Tragic 2.9% | Tragic 2.6% |