Chinese vs Chickasaw Community Comparison
COMPARE
Chinese
Chickasaw
Social Comparison
Social Comparison
Chinese
Chickasaw
9,296
SOCIAL INDEX
90.4/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
23rd/ 347
SOCIAL RANK
3,663
SOCIAL INDEX
34.2/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
212th/ 347
SOCIAL RANK
Chickasaw Integration in Chinese Communities
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 47,187,635 people shows a significant positive correlation between the proportion of Chickasaw within Chinese communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.697. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Chinese within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.091% in Chickasaw. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Chinese corresponds to an increase of 90.8 Chickasaw.
Chinese vs Chickasaw Income
When considering income, the most significant differences between Chinese and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in householder income over 65 years ($77,465 compared to $53,732, a difference of 44.2%), householder income ages 45 - 64 years ($116,156 compared to $82,193, a difference of 41.3%), and median household income ($98,496 compared to $70,005, a difference of 40.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of wage/income gap (25.9% compared to 27.2%, a difference of 4.9%), median male earnings ($56,872 compared to $47,832, a difference of 18.9%), and median earnings ($48,836 compared to $40,672, a difference of 20.1%).
Income Metric | Chinese | Chickasaw |
Per Capita Income | Exceptional $46,098 | Tragic $36,475 |
Median Family Income | Exceptional $116,188 | Tragic $85,356 |
Median Household Income | Exceptional $98,496 | Tragic $70,005 |
Median Earnings | Exceptional $48,836 | Tragic $40,672 |
Median Male Earnings | Exceptional $56,872 | Tragic $47,832 |
Median Female Earnings | Exceptional $41,461 | Tragic $34,414 |
Householder Age | Under 25 years | Exceptional $58,162 | Tragic $44,763 |
Householder Age | 25 - 44 years | Exceptional $104,264 | Tragic $77,929 |
Householder Age | 45 - 64 years | Exceptional $116,156 | Tragic $82,193 |
Householder Age | Over 65 years | Exceptional $77,465 | Tragic $53,732 |
Wage/Income Gap | Average 25.9% | Tragic 27.2% |
Chinese vs Chickasaw Poverty
When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Chinese and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in child poverty under the age of 5 (13.1% compared to 21.8%, a difference of 67.1%), child poverty among boys under 16 (11.9% compared to 19.8%, a difference of 66.9%), and family poverty (6.5% compared to 10.8%, a difference of 66.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of single father poverty (15.4% compared to 19.0%, a difference of 23.1%), seniors poverty over the age of 65 (8.3% compared to 10.7%, a difference of 28.2%), and seniors poverty over the age of 75 (9.1% compared to 11.6%, a difference of 28.3%).
Poverty Metric | Chinese | Chickasaw |
Poverty | Exceptional 9.5% | Tragic 14.7% |
Families | Exceptional 6.5% | Tragic 10.8% |
Males | Exceptional 8.7% | Tragic 13.5% |
Females | Exceptional 10.4% | Tragic 15.9% |
Females 18 to 24 years | Exceptional 16.2% | Tragic 24.5% |
Females 25 to 34 years | Exceptional 11.0% | Tragic 17.0% |
Children Under 5 years | Exceptional 13.1% | Tragic 21.8% |
Children Under 16 years | Exceptional 11.9% | Tragic 19.5% |
Boys Under 16 years | Exceptional 11.9% | Tragic 19.8% |
Girls Under 16 years | Exceptional 12.3% | Tragic 19.6% |
Single Males | Exceptional 11.0% | Tragic 16.3% |
Single Females | Exceptional 16.1% | Tragic 26.3% |
Single Fathers | Exceptional 15.4% | Tragic 19.0% |
Single Mothers | Exceptional 24.6% | Tragic 34.4% |
Married Couples | Exceptional 3.6% | Tragic 5.8% |
Seniors Over 65 years | Exceptional 8.3% | Good 10.7% |
Seniors Over 75 years | Exceptional 9.1% | Exceptional 11.6% |
Receiving Food Stamps | Exceptional 9.8% | Tragic 13.1% |
Chinese vs Chickasaw Unemployment
When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Chinese and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among women with children under 6 years (6.8% compared to 9.0%, a difference of 31.8%), unemployment among seniors over 75 years (5.9% compared to 7.3%, a difference of 24.3%), and unemployment among ages 30 to 34 years (5.1% compared to 6.2%, a difference of 21.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among ages 16 to 19 years (16.0% compared to 16.7%, a difference of 3.9%), unemployment among youth under 25 years (10.7% compared to 11.2%, a difference of 4.2%), and unemployment among seniors over 65 years (4.2% compared to 4.4%, a difference of 5.0%).
Unemployment Metric | Chinese | Chickasaw |
Unemployment | Exceptional 4.7% | Exceptional 5.0% |
Males | Exceptional 4.9% | Excellent 5.2% |
Females | Exceptional 4.5% | Excellent 5.1% |
Youth < 25 | Exceptional 10.7% | Exceptional 11.2% |
Age | 16 to 19 years | Exceptional 16.0% | Exceptional 16.7% |
Age | 20 to 24 years | Exceptional 9.4% | Exceptional 9.9% |
Age | 25 to 29 years | Exceptional 6.1% | Fair 6.7% |
Age | 30 to 34 years | Exceptional 5.1% | Tragic 6.2% |
Age | 35 to 44 years | Exceptional 4.3% | Tragic 4.9% |
Age | 45 to 54 years | Exceptional 4.0% | Exceptional 4.2% |
Age | 55 to 59 years | Exceptional 4.4% | Good 4.8% |
Age | 60 to 64 years | Exceptional 4.0% | Exceptional 4.3% |
Age | 65 to 74 years | Exceptional 4.4% | Exceptional 4.7% |
Seniors > 65 | Exceptional 4.2% | Exceptional 4.4% |
Seniors > 75 | Exceptional 5.9% | Exceptional 7.3% |
Women w/ Children < 6 | Exceptional 6.8% | Tragic 9.0% |
Women w/ Children 6 to 17 | Tragic 9.3% | Exceptional 8.6% |
Women w/ Children < 18 | Exceptional 4.9% | Good 5.4% |
Chinese vs Chickasaw Labor Participation
When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Chinese and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 45-54 (84.1% compared to 79.0%, a difference of 6.5%), in labor force | age 20-64 (80.7% compared to 76.2%, a difference of 5.9%), and in labor force | age 35-44 (85.1% compared to 80.9%, a difference of 5.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 16-19 (38.6% compared to 38.3%, a difference of 0.73%), in labor force | age 25-29 (84.3% compared to 81.9%, a difference of 3.0%), and in labor force | age 20-24 (77.3% compared to 74.5%, a difference of 3.8%).
Labor Participation Metric | Chinese | Chickasaw |
In Labor Force | Age > 16 | Tragic 64.7% | Tragic 62.3% |
In Labor Force | Age 20-64 | Exceptional 80.7% | Tragic 76.2% |
In Labor Force | Age 16-19 | Exceptional 38.6% | Exceptional 38.3% |
In Labor Force | Age 20-24 | Exceptional 77.3% | Poor 74.5% |
In Labor Force | Age 25-29 | Poor 84.3% | Tragic 81.9% |
In Labor Force | Age 30-34 | Excellent 85.0% | Tragic 81.9% |
In Labor Force | Age 35-44 | Exceptional 85.1% | Tragic 80.9% |
In Labor Force | Age 45-54 | Exceptional 84.1% | Tragic 79.0% |
Chinese vs Chickasaw Family Structure
When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Chinese and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in single father households (2.0% compared to 2.8%, a difference of 39.5%), single mother households (5.2% compared to 7.0%, a difference of 36.4%), and divorced or separated (11.2% compared to 14.2%, a difference of 27.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of average family size (3.34 compared to 3.19, a difference of 4.8%), family households (68.1% compared to 64.4%, a difference of 5.8%), and currently married (49.5% compared to 46.6%, a difference of 6.2%).
Family Structure Metric | Chinese | Chickasaw |
Family Households | Exceptional 68.1% | Good 64.4% |
Family Households with Children | Tragic 26.0% | Exceptional 28.2% |
Married-couple Households | Exceptional 50.4% | Fair 45.9% |
Average Family Size | Exceptional 3.34 | Tragic 3.19 |
Single Father Households | Exceptional 2.0% | Tragic 2.8% |
Single Mother Households | Exceptional 5.2% | Tragic 7.0% |
Currently Married | Exceptional 49.5% | Average 46.6% |
Divorced or Separated | Exceptional 11.2% | Tragic 14.2% |
Births to Unmarried Women | Excellent 30.2% | Tragic 36.3% |
Chinese vs Chickasaw Vehicle Availability
When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Chinese and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in 4 or more vehicles in household (8.8% compared to 7.4%, a difference of 19.0%), 3 or more vehicles in household (23.9% compared to 22.2%, a difference of 7.5%), and no vehicles in household (8.2% compared to 7.9%, a difference of 4.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (91.9% compared to 92.3%, a difference of 0.45%), 2 or more vehicles in household (60.1% compared to 59.0%, a difference of 1.9%), and no vehicles in household (8.2% compared to 7.9%, a difference of 4.6%).
Vehicle Availability Metric | Chinese | Chickasaw |
No Vehicles Available | Exceptional 8.2% | Exceptional 7.9% |
1+ Vehicles Available | Exceptional 91.9% | Exceptional 92.3% |
2+ Vehicles Available | Exceptional 60.1% | Exceptional 59.0% |
3+ Vehicles Available | Exceptional 23.9% | Exceptional 22.2% |
4+ Vehicles Available | Exceptional 8.8% | Exceptional 7.4% |
Chinese vs Chickasaw Education Level
When considering education level, the most significant differences between Chinese and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in professional degree (4.5% compared to 3.4%, a difference of 32.8%), master's degree (14.6% compared to 11.4%, a difference of 27.6%), and bachelor's degree (38.5% compared to 30.4%, a difference of 26.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1st grade (98.5% compared to 98.3%, a difference of 0.17%), nursery school (98.6% compared to 98.4%, a difference of 0.18%), and kindergarten (98.5% compared to 98.4%, a difference of 0.18%).
Education Level Metric | Chinese | Chickasaw |
No Schooling Completed | Exceptional 1.5% | Exceptional 1.7% |
Nursery School | Exceptional 98.6% | Exceptional 98.4% |
Kindergarten | Exceptional 98.5% | Exceptional 98.4% |
1st Grade | Exceptional 98.5% | Exceptional 98.3% |
2nd Grade | Exceptional 98.5% | Exceptional 98.3% |
3rd Grade | Exceptional 98.4% | Exceptional 98.2% |
4th Grade | Exceptional 98.3% | Exceptional 98.0% |
5th Grade | Exceptional 98.1% | Exceptional 97.9% |
6th Grade | Exceptional 97.9% | Exceptional 97.6% |
7th Grade | Exceptional 97.1% | Exceptional 96.7% |
8th Grade | Exceptional 96.9% | Exceptional 96.4% |
9th Grade | Exceptional 96.3% | Exceptional 95.5% |
10th Grade | Exceptional 95.5% | Excellent 94.1% |
11th Grade | Exceptional 94.6% | Fair 92.3% |
12th Grade, No Diploma | Exceptional 93.6% | Tragic 90.3% |
High School Diploma | Exceptional 92.0% | Poor 88.4% |
GED/Equivalency | Exceptional 89.0% | Tragic 83.8% |
College, Under 1 year | Exceptional 68.3% | Tragic 60.4% |
College, 1 year or more | Exceptional 62.2% | Tragic 53.3% |
Associate's Degree | Exceptional 48.5% | Tragic 38.6% |
Bachelor's Degree | Good 38.5% | Tragic 30.4% |
Master's Degree | Fair 14.6% | Tragic 11.4% |
Professional Degree | Average 4.5% | Tragic 3.4% |
Doctorate Degree | Fair 1.8% | Tragic 1.5% |
Chinese vs Chickasaw Disability
When considering disability, the most significant differences between Chinese and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in disability age 35 to 64 (10.3% compared to 16.1%, a difference of 56.4%), vision disability (2.0% compared to 3.2%, a difference of 55.4%), and disability age under 5 (1.1% compared to 1.7%, a difference of 52.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of disability age over 75 (48.7% compared to 51.2%, a difference of 5.1%), self-care disability (2.6% compared to 2.9%, a difference of 11.3%), and cognitive disability (15.9% compared to 18.5%, a difference of 16.1%).
Disability Metric | Chinese | Chickasaw |
Disability | Tragic 12.2% | Tragic 15.2% |
Males | Tragic 12.1% | Tragic 15.1% |
Females | Fair 12.3% | Tragic 15.2% |
Age | Under 5 years | Exceptional 1.1% | Tragic 1.7% |
Age | 5 to 17 years | Exceptional 4.7% | Tragic 6.8% |
Age | 18 to 34 years | Exceptional 6.3% | Tragic 9.0% |
Age | 35 to 64 years | Exceptional 10.3% | Tragic 16.1% |
Age | 65 to 74 years | Exceptional 21.7% | Tragic 30.2% |
Age | Over 75 years | Tragic 48.7% | Tragic 51.2% |
Vision | Exceptional 2.0% | Tragic 3.2% |
Hearing | Tragic 3.7% | Tragic 4.5% |
Cognitive | Exceptional 15.9% | Tragic 18.5% |
Ambulatory | Tragic 6.5% | Tragic 8.0% |
Self-Care | Tragic 2.6% | Tragic 2.9% |