Chinese vs Filipino Community Comparison

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 56,123,699 people shows no correlation between the proportion of Filipinos within Chinese communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.043. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Chinese within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.008% in Filipinos. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Chinese corresponds to an increase of 7.5 Filipinos.

When considering income, the most significant differences between Chinese and Filipino communities in the United States are seen in median male earnings ($56,872 compared to $74,224, a difference of 30.5%), per capita income ($46,098 compared to $59,066, a difference of 28.1%), and median earnings ($48,836 compared to $61,197, a difference of 25.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of householder income under 25 years ($58,162 compared to $57,740, a difference of 0.73%), householder income over 65 years ($77,465 compared to $76,686, a difference of 1.0%), and wage/income gap (25.9% compared to 29.7%, a difference of 14.6%).

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Chinese and Filipino communities in the United States are seen in receiving food stamps (9.8% compared to 7.4%, a difference of 32.1%), seniors poverty over the age of 75 (9.1% compared to 11.4%, a difference of 26.1%), and female poverty among 18-24 year olds (16.2% compared to 19.0%, a difference of 17.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of single mother poverty (24.6% compared to 24.3%, a difference of 1.3%), family poverty (6.5% compared to 6.6%, a difference of 2.2%), and single male poverty (11.0% compared to 10.6%, a difference of 3.4%).

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Chinese and Filipino communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among seniors over 75 years (5.9% compared to 7.9%, a difference of 33.3%), unemployment among women with children ages 6 to 17 years (9.3% compared to 7.6%, a difference of 22.1%), and unemployment among ages 60 to 64 years (4.0% compared to 4.8%, a difference of 20.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among ages 25 to 29 years (6.1% compared to 6.1%, a difference of 0.35%), unemployment among ages 16 to 19 years (16.0% compared to 15.9%, a difference of 0.77%), and unemployment (4.7% compared to 4.8%, a difference of 3.6%).

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Chinese and Filipino communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (38.6% compared to 31.7%, a difference of 21.8%), in labor force | age 20-24 (77.3% compared to 71.4%, a difference of 8.2%), and in labor force | age > 16 (64.7% compared to 65.9%, a difference of 2.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 35-44 (85.1% compared to 84.7%, a difference of 0.39%), in labor force | age 30-34 (85.0% compared to 85.5%, a difference of 0.61%), and in labor force | age 25-29 (84.3% compared to 84.9%, a difference of 0.71%).

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Chinese and Filipino communities in the United States are seen in births to unmarried women (30.2% compared to 23.0%, a difference of 31.6%), divorced or separated (11.2% compared to 9.9%, a difference of 12.9%), and single mother households (5.2% compared to 4.7%, a difference of 9.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of currently married (49.5% compared to 49.7%, a difference of 0.46%), married-couple households (50.4% compared to 51.0%, a difference of 1.2%), and family households (68.1% compared to 65.9%, a difference of 3.4%).

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Chinese and Filipino communities in the United States are seen in 4 or more vehicles in household (8.8% compared to 6.9%, a difference of 27.9%), no vehicles in household (8.2% compared to 10.4%, a difference of 26.6%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (23.9% compared to 20.8%, a difference of 14.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (91.9% compared to 89.7%, a difference of 2.4%), 2 or more vehicles in household (60.1% compared to 57.8%, a difference of 3.9%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (23.9% compared to 20.8%, a difference of 14.8%).

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Chinese and Filipino communities in the United States are seen in doctorate degree (1.8% compared to 3.4%, a difference of 94.6%), professional degree (4.5% compared to 7.6%, a difference of 69.5%), and master's degree (14.6% compared to 23.4%, a difference of 60.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 12th grade, no diploma (93.6% compared to 93.2%, a difference of 0.37%), high school diploma (92.0% compared to 91.6%, a difference of 0.47%), and nursery school (98.6% compared to 98.1%, a difference of 0.50%).

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Chinese and Filipino communities in the United States are seen in hearing disability (3.7% compared to 2.6%, a difference of 41.3%), ambulatory disability (6.5% compared to 4.9%, a difference of 33.3%), and male disability (12.1% compared to 9.1%, a difference of 32.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of cognitive disability (15.9% compared to 16.4%, a difference of 2.9%), disability age over 75 (48.7% compared to 45.4%, a difference of 7.3%), and disability age 5 to 17 (4.7% compared to 4.3%, a difference of 8.2%).