Chickasaw vs Guatemalan Community Comparison
COMPARE
Chickasaw
Guatemalan
Social Comparison
Social Comparison
Chickasaw
Guatemalans
3,663
SOCIAL INDEX
34.2/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
212th/ 347
SOCIAL RANK
1,497
SOCIAL INDEX
12.5/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
305th/ 347
SOCIAL RANK
Guatemalan Integration in Chickasaw Communities
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 132,705,432 people shows a mild negative correlation between the proportion of Guatemalans within Chickasaw communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of -0.300. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Chickasaw within a typical geography, there is a decrease of 0.047% in Guatemalans. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Chickasaw corresponds to a decrease of 47.4 Guatemalans.
Chickasaw vs Guatemalan Income
When considering income, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Guatemalan communities in the United States are seen in wage/income gap (27.2% compared to 22.6%, a difference of 20.1%), householder income under 25 years ($44,763 compared to $51,525, a difference of 15.1%), and median household income ($70,005 compared to $75,961, a difference of 8.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of median earnings ($40,672 compared to $41,205, a difference of 1.3%), householder income over 65 years ($53,732 compared to $54,526, a difference of 1.5%), and median male earnings ($47,832 compared to $46,736, a difference of 2.3%).
Income Metric | Chickasaw | Guatemalan |
Per Capita Income | Tragic $36,475 | Tragic $37,766 |
Median Family Income | Tragic $85,356 | Tragic $88,295 |
Median Household Income | Tragic $70,005 | Tragic $75,961 |
Median Earnings | Tragic $40,672 | Tragic $41,205 |
Median Male Earnings | Tragic $47,832 | Tragic $46,736 |
Median Female Earnings | Tragic $34,414 | Tragic $35,695 |
Householder Age | Under 25 years | Tragic $44,763 | Poor $51,525 |
Householder Age | 25 - 44 years | Tragic $77,929 | Tragic $82,331 |
Householder Age | 45 - 64 years | Tragic $82,193 | Tragic $87,705 |
Householder Age | Over 65 years | Tragic $53,732 | Tragic $54,526 |
Wage/Income Gap | Tragic 27.2% | Exceptional 22.6% |
Chickasaw vs Guatemalan Poverty
When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Guatemalan communities in the United States are seen in seniors poverty over the age of 75 (11.6% compared to 14.8%, a difference of 27.1%), seniors poverty over the age of 65 (10.7% compared to 13.5%, a difference of 26.6%), and married-couple family poverty (5.8% compared to 7.0%, a difference of 21.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of child poverty under the age of 5 (21.8% compared to 21.6%, a difference of 0.82%), male poverty (13.5% compared to 13.8%, a difference of 2.4%), and female poverty among 25-34 year olds (17.0% compared to 16.4%, a difference of 3.8%).
Poverty Metric | Chickasaw | Guatemalan |
Poverty | Tragic 14.7% | Tragic 15.3% |
Families | Tragic 10.8% | Tragic 11.7% |
Males | Tragic 13.5% | Tragic 13.8% |
Females | Tragic 15.9% | Tragic 16.7% |
Females 18 to 24 years | Tragic 24.5% | Tragic 20.7% |
Females 25 to 34 years | Tragic 17.0% | Tragic 16.4% |
Children Under 5 years | Tragic 21.8% | Tragic 21.6% |
Children Under 16 years | Tragic 19.5% | Tragic 21.2% |
Boys Under 16 years | Tragic 19.8% | Tragic 21.1% |
Girls Under 16 years | Tragic 19.6% | Tragic 21.4% |
Single Males | Tragic 16.3% | Tragic 13.8% |
Single Females | Tragic 26.3% | Tragic 23.8% |
Single Fathers | Tragic 19.0% | Poor 16.6% |
Single Mothers | Tragic 34.4% | Tragic 32.9% |
Married Couples | Tragic 5.8% | Tragic 7.0% |
Seniors Over 65 years | Good 10.7% | Tragic 13.5% |
Seniors Over 75 years | Exceptional 11.6% | Tragic 14.8% |
Receiving Food Stamps | Tragic 13.1% | Tragic 14.4% |
Chickasaw vs Guatemalan Unemployment
When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Guatemalan communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among seniors over 65 years (4.4% compared to 5.6%, a difference of 26.7%), unemployment among ages 65 to 74 years (4.7% compared to 5.8%, a difference of 23.9%), and unemployment among ages 60 to 64 years (4.3% compared to 5.2%, a difference of 20.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among women with children under 6 years (9.0% compared to 8.7%, a difference of 3.5%), unemployment among ages 30 to 34 years (6.2% compared to 6.0%, a difference of 3.6%), and unemployment among ages 35 to 44 years (4.9% compared to 5.1%, a difference of 4.4%).
Unemployment Metric | Chickasaw | Guatemalan |
Unemployment | Exceptional 5.0% | Tragic 5.8% |
Males | Excellent 5.2% | Tragic 5.6% |
Females | Excellent 5.1% | Tragic 6.0% |
Youth < 25 | Exceptional 11.2% | Tragic 12.1% |
Age | 16 to 19 years | Exceptional 16.7% | Tragic 18.6% |
Age | 20 to 24 years | Exceptional 9.9% | Poor 10.5% |
Age | 25 to 29 years | Fair 6.7% | Tragic 7.1% |
Age | 30 to 34 years | Tragic 6.2% | Tragic 6.0% |
Age | 35 to 44 years | Tragic 4.9% | Tragic 5.1% |
Age | 45 to 54 years | Exceptional 4.2% | Tragic 4.9% |
Age | 55 to 59 years | Good 4.8% | Tragic 5.3% |
Age | 60 to 64 years | Exceptional 4.3% | Tragic 5.2% |
Age | 65 to 74 years | Exceptional 4.7% | Tragic 5.8% |
Seniors > 65 | Exceptional 4.4% | Tragic 5.6% |
Seniors > 75 | Exceptional 7.3% | Fair 8.8% |
Women w/ Children < 6 | Tragic 9.0% | Tragic 8.7% |
Women w/ Children 6 to 17 | Exceptional 8.6% | Tragic 9.3% |
Women w/ Children < 18 | Good 5.4% | Tragic 6.3% |
Chickasaw vs Guatemalan Labor Participation
When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Guatemalan communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (38.3% compared to 35.5%, a difference of 8.0%), in labor force | age > 16 (62.3% compared to 65.6%, a difference of 5.3%), and in labor force | age 20-64 (76.2% compared to 78.7%, a difference of 3.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 20-24 (74.5% compared to 75.3%, a difference of 1.2%), in labor force | age 25-29 (81.9% compared to 83.7%, a difference of 2.2%), and in labor force | age 30-34 (81.9% compared to 83.7%, a difference of 2.2%).
Labor Participation Metric | Chickasaw | Guatemalan |
In Labor Force | Age > 16 | Tragic 62.3% | Exceptional 65.6% |
In Labor Force | Age 20-64 | Tragic 76.2% | Tragic 78.7% |
In Labor Force | Age 16-19 | Exceptional 38.3% | Tragic 35.5% |
In Labor Force | Age 20-24 | Poor 74.5% | Good 75.3% |
In Labor Force | Age 25-29 | Tragic 81.9% | Tragic 83.7% |
In Labor Force | Age 30-34 | Tragic 81.9% | Tragic 83.7% |
In Labor Force | Age 35-44 | Tragic 80.9% | Tragic 83.0% |
In Labor Force | Age 45-54 | Tragic 79.0% | Tragic 81.2% |
Chickasaw vs Guatemalan Family Structure
When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Guatemalan communities in the United States are seen in divorced or separated (14.2% compared to 12.2%, a difference of 16.8%), single mother households (7.0% compared to 7.7%, a difference of 8.8%), and currently married (46.6% compared to 42.9%, a difference of 8.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of family households (64.4% compared to 65.2%, a difference of 1.3%), births to unmarried women (36.3% compared to 37.1%, a difference of 2.3%), and family households with children (28.2% compared to 28.9%, a difference of 2.4%).
Family Structure Metric | Chickasaw | Guatemalan |
Family Households | Good 64.4% | Exceptional 65.2% |
Family Households with Children | Exceptional 28.2% | Exceptional 28.9% |
Married-couple Households | Fair 45.9% | Tragic 43.3% |
Average Family Size | Tragic 3.19 | Exceptional 3.40 |
Single Father Households | Tragic 2.8% | Tragic 3.0% |
Single Mother Households | Tragic 7.0% | Tragic 7.7% |
Currently Married | Average 46.6% | Tragic 42.9% |
Divorced or Separated | Tragic 14.2% | Fair 12.2% |
Births to Unmarried Women | Tragic 36.3% | Tragic 37.1% |
Chickasaw vs Guatemalan Vehicle Availability
When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Guatemalan communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (7.9% compared to 11.0%, a difference of 39.8%), 3 or more vehicles in household (22.2% compared to 20.1%, a difference of 10.6%), and 2 or more vehicles in household (59.0% compared to 54.1%, a difference of 9.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (92.3% compared to 89.2%, a difference of 3.5%), 4 or more vehicles in household (7.4% compared to 7.0%, a difference of 7.0%), and 2 or more vehicles in household (59.0% compared to 54.1%, a difference of 9.0%).
Vehicle Availability Metric | Chickasaw | Guatemalan |
No Vehicles Available | Exceptional 7.9% | Poor 11.0% |
1+ Vehicles Available | Exceptional 92.3% | Poor 89.2% |
2+ Vehicles Available | Exceptional 59.0% | Tragic 54.1% |
3+ Vehicles Available | Exceptional 22.2% | Excellent 20.1% |
4+ Vehicles Available | Exceptional 7.4% | Exceptional 7.0% |
Chickasaw vs Guatemalan Education Level
When considering education level, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Guatemalan communities in the United States are seen in no schooling completed (1.7% compared to 3.5%, a difference of 104.2%), high school diploma (88.4% compared to 82.0%, a difference of 7.9%), and 10th grade (94.1% compared to 87.9%, a difference of 7.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of associate's degree (38.6% compared to 38.5%, a difference of 0.29%), nursery school (98.4% compared to 96.6%, a difference of 1.9%), and kindergarten (98.4% compared to 96.5%, a difference of 1.9%).
Education Level Metric | Chickasaw | Guatemalan |
No Schooling Completed | Exceptional 1.7% | Tragic 3.5% |
Nursery School | Exceptional 98.4% | Tragic 96.6% |
Kindergarten | Exceptional 98.4% | Tragic 96.5% |
1st Grade | Exceptional 98.3% | Tragic 96.5% |
2nd Grade | Exceptional 98.3% | Tragic 96.3% |
3rd Grade | Exceptional 98.2% | Tragic 96.0% |
4th Grade | Exceptional 98.0% | Tragic 95.3% |
5th Grade | Exceptional 97.9% | Tragic 94.8% |
6th Grade | Exceptional 97.6% | Tragic 94.2% |
7th Grade | Exceptional 96.7% | Tragic 91.7% |
8th Grade | Exceptional 96.4% | Tragic 91.1% |
9th Grade | Exceptional 95.5% | Tragic 89.9% |
10th Grade | Excellent 94.1% | Tragic 87.9% |
11th Grade | Fair 92.3% | Tragic 86.4% |
12th Grade, No Diploma | Tragic 90.3% | Tragic 84.6% |
High School Diploma | Poor 88.4% | Tragic 82.0% |
GED/Equivalency | Tragic 83.8% | Tragic 78.5% |
College, Under 1 year | Tragic 60.4% | Tragic 56.8% |
College, 1 year or more | Tragic 53.3% | Tragic 51.2% |
Associate's Degree | Tragic 38.6% | Tragic 38.5% |
Bachelor's Degree | Tragic 30.4% | Tragic 31.0% |
Master's Degree | Tragic 11.4% | Tragic 11.7% |
Professional Degree | Tragic 3.4% | Tragic 3.5% |
Doctorate Degree | Tragic 1.5% | Tragic 1.4% |
Chickasaw vs Guatemalan Disability
When considering disability, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Guatemalan communities in the United States are seen in hearing disability (4.5% compared to 2.8%, a difference of 59.2%), disability age under 5 (1.7% compared to 1.2%, a difference of 42.1%), and disability age 18 to 34 (9.0% compared to 6.4%, a difference of 41.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of cognitive disability (18.5% compared to 17.8%, a difference of 4.2%), disability age over 75 (51.2% compared to 49.0%, a difference of 4.4%), and self-care disability (2.9% compared to 2.6%, a difference of 11.2%).
Disability Metric | Chickasaw | Guatemalan |
Disability | Tragic 15.2% | Good 11.6% |
Males | Tragic 15.1% | Good 11.1% |
Females | Tragic 15.2% | Good 12.1% |
Age | Under 5 years | Tragic 1.7% | Good 1.2% |
Age | 5 to 17 years | Tragic 6.8% | Excellent 5.5% |
Age | 18 to 34 years | Tragic 9.0% | Excellent 6.4% |
Age | 35 to 64 years | Tragic 16.1% | Poor 11.7% |
Age | 65 to 74 years | Tragic 30.2% | Tragic 25.5% |
Age | Over 75 years | Tragic 51.2% | Tragic 49.0% |
Vision | Tragic 3.2% | Tragic 2.3% |
Hearing | Tragic 4.5% | Exceptional 2.8% |
Cognitive | Tragic 18.5% | Tragic 17.8% |
Ambulatory | Tragic 8.0% | Fair 6.2% |
Self-Care | Tragic 2.9% | Tragic 2.6% |