Chinese vs Subsaharan African Community Comparison

COMPARE

Chinese
Race
Ancestry
AfghanAfricanAlaska NativeAlaskan AthabascanAlbanianAleutAlsatianAmericanApacheArabArapahoArgentineanArmenianAssyrian/Chaldean/SyriacAustralianAustrianBahamianBangladeshiBarbadianBasqueBelgianBelizeanBermudanBhutaneseBlackfeetBolivianBrazilianBritishBritish West IndianBulgarianBurmeseCajunCambodianCanadianCape 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 LankanSudaneseSwedishSwissSyrianTaiwaneseThaiTlingit-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
Subsaharan African
Race
Ancestry
AfghanAfricanAlaska NativeAlaskan AthabascanAlbanianAleutAlsatianAmericanApacheArabArapahoArgentineanArmenianAssyrian/Chaldean/SyriacAustralianAustrianBahamianBangladeshiBarbadianBasqueBelgianBelizeanBermudanBhutaneseBlackfeetBolivianBrazilianBritishBritish West IndianBulgarianBurmeseCajunCambodianCanadianCape VerdeanCarpatho RusynCelticCentral AmericanCentral American IndianCherokeeCheyenneChickasawChileanChippewaChoctawColombianColvilleComancheCosta 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 LankaSudanSwedenSwitzerlandSyriaTaiwanThailandTrinidad and TobagoTurkeyUgandaUkraineUruguayUzbekistanVenezuelaVietnamWest IndiesWestern AfricaWestern AsiaWestern EuropeYemenZaireZimbabweAzores
Social Comparison
Social Comparison
Income
Poverty
Unemployment
Labor Participation
Family Structure
Vehicle Availability
Education Level
Disability

Social Comparison

Chinese

Sub-Saharan Africans

Exceptional
Tragic
9,296
SOCIAL INDEX
90.4/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
23rd/ 347
SOCIAL RANK
977
SOCIAL INDEX
7.3/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
330th/ 347
SOCIAL RANK

Subsaharan African Integration in Chinese Communities

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 63,983,932 people shows a substantial positive correlation between the proportion of Sub-Saharan Africans within Chinese communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.515. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Chinese within a typical geography, there is an increase of 1.682% in Sub-Saharan Africans. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Chinese corresponds to an increase of 1,682.1 Sub-Saharan Africans.
Chinese Integration in Subsaharan African Communities

Chinese vs Subsaharan African Income

When considering income, the most significant differences between Chinese and Subsaharan African communities in the United States are seen in householder income over 65 years ($77,465 compared to $56,615, a difference of 36.8%), householder income ages 45 - 64 years ($116,156 compared to $90,691, a difference of 28.1%), and median household income ($98,496 compared to $77,631, a difference of 26.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of median female earnings ($41,461 compared to $38,391, a difference of 8.0%), median earnings ($48,836 compared to $44,118, a difference of 10.7%), and median male earnings ($56,872 compared to $50,408, a difference of 12.8%).
Chinese vs Subsaharan African Income
Income MetricChineseSubsaharan African
Per Capita Income
Exceptional
$46,098
Tragic
$40,152
Median Family Income
Exceptional
$116,188
Tragic
$93,748
Median Household Income
Exceptional
$98,496
Tragic
$77,631
Median Earnings
Exceptional
$48,836
Tragic
$44,118
Median Male Earnings
Exceptional
$56,872
Tragic
$50,408
Median Female Earnings
Exceptional
$41,461
Tragic
$38,391
Householder Age | Under 25 years
Exceptional
$58,162
Tragic
$48,691
Householder Age | 25 - 44 years
Exceptional
$104,264
Tragic
$84,235
Householder Age | 45 - 64 years
Exceptional
$116,156
Tragic
$90,691
Householder Age | Over 65 years
Exceptional
$77,465
Tragic
$56,615
Wage/Income Gap
Average
25.9%
Exceptional
22.8%

Chinese vs Subsaharan African Poverty

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Chinese and Subsaharan African communities in the United States are seen in child poverty among boys under 16 (11.9% compared to 20.0%, a difference of 68.4%), child poverty under the age of 16 (11.9% compared to 19.9%, a difference of 66.9%), and family poverty (6.5% compared to 10.9%, a difference of 66.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of single father poverty (15.4% compared to 16.9%, a difference of 9.9%), single male poverty (11.0% compared to 13.7%, a difference of 24.7%), and single mother poverty (24.6% compared to 31.4%, a difference of 27.4%).
Chinese vs Subsaharan African Poverty
Poverty MetricChineseSubsaharan African
Poverty
Exceptional
9.5%
Tragic
14.5%
Families
Exceptional
6.5%
Tragic
10.9%
Males
Exceptional
8.7%
Tragic
13.3%
Females
Exceptional
10.4%
Tragic
15.8%
Females 18 to 24 years
Exceptional
16.2%
Tragic
22.0%
Females 25 to 34 years
Exceptional
11.0%
Tragic
15.6%
Children Under 5 years
Exceptional
13.1%
Tragic
20.8%
Children Under 16 years
Exceptional
11.9%
Tragic
19.9%
Boys Under 16 years
Exceptional
11.9%
Tragic
20.0%
Girls Under 16 years
Exceptional
12.3%
Tragic
20.1%
Single Males
Exceptional
11.0%
Tragic
13.7%
Single Females
Exceptional
16.1%
Tragic
23.2%
Single Fathers
Exceptional
15.4%
Tragic
16.9%
Single Mothers
Exceptional
24.6%
Tragic
31.4%
Married Couples
Exceptional
3.6%
Tragic
5.7%
Seniors Over 65 years
Exceptional
8.3%
Tragic
12.1%
Seniors Over 75 years
Exceptional
9.1%
Tragic
13.2%
Receiving Food Stamps
Exceptional
9.8%
Tragic
14.1%

Chinese vs Subsaharan African Unemployment

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Chinese and Subsaharan African communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among seniors over 75 years (5.9% compared to 9.2%, a difference of 55.3%), female unemployment (4.5% compared to 5.7%, a difference of 27.2%), and unemployment among women with children under 18 years (4.9% compared to 6.2%, a difference of 25.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among women with children ages 6 to 17 years (9.3% compared to 10.0%, a difference of 8.1%), unemployment among ages 55 to 59 years (4.4% compared to 5.0%, a difference of 12.8%), and unemployment among ages 16 to 19 years (16.0% compared to 18.7%, a difference of 16.7%).
Chinese vs Subsaharan African Unemployment
Unemployment MetricChineseSubsaharan African
Unemployment
Exceptional
4.7%
Tragic
5.8%
Males
Exceptional
4.9%
Tragic
6.0%
Females
Exceptional
4.5%
Tragic
5.7%
Youth < 25
Exceptional
10.7%
Tragic
12.6%
Age | 16 to 19 years
Exceptional
16.0%
Tragic
18.7%
Age | 20 to 24 years
Exceptional
9.4%
Tragic
11.1%
Age | 25 to 29 years
Exceptional
6.1%
Tragic
7.2%
Age | 30 to 34 years
Exceptional
5.1%
Tragic
6.0%
Age | 35 to 44 years
Exceptional
4.3%
Tragic
5.3%
Age | 45 to 54 years
Exceptional
4.0%
Tragic
4.9%
Age | 55 to 59 years
Exceptional
4.4%
Tragic
5.0%
Age | 60 to 64 years
Exceptional
4.0%
Fair
4.9%
Age | 65 to 74 years
Exceptional
4.4%
Poor
5.4%
Seniors > 65
Exceptional
4.2%
Poor
5.2%
Seniors > 75
Exceptional
5.9%
Tragic
9.2%
Women w/ Children < 6
Exceptional
6.8%
Tragic
8.4%
Women w/ Children 6 to 17
Tragic
9.3%
Tragic
10.0%
Women w/ Children < 18
Exceptional
4.9%
Tragic
6.2%

Chinese vs Subsaharan African Labor Participation

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Chinese and Subsaharan African communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 45-54 (84.1% compared to 82.0%, a difference of 2.7%), in labor force | age > 16 (64.7% compared to 66.2%, a difference of 2.4%), and in labor force | age 20-24 (77.3% compared to 75.7%, a difference of 2.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 25-29 (84.3% compared to 84.3%, a difference of 0.020%), in labor force | age 16-19 (38.6% compared to 38.4%, a difference of 0.43%), and in labor force | age 30-34 (85.0% compared to 84.5%, a difference of 0.64%).
Chinese vs Subsaharan African Labor Participation
Labor Participation MetricChineseSubsaharan African
In Labor Force | Age > 16
Tragic
64.7%
Exceptional
66.2%
In Labor Force | Age 20-64
Exceptional
80.7%
Poor
79.3%
In Labor Force | Age 16-19
Exceptional
38.6%
Exceptional
38.4%
In Labor Force | Age 20-24
Exceptional
77.3%
Exceptional
75.7%
In Labor Force | Age 25-29
Poor
84.3%
Poor
84.3%
In Labor Force | Age 30-34
Excellent
85.0%
Poor
84.5%
In Labor Force | Age 35-44
Exceptional
85.1%
Tragic
84.1%
In Labor Force | Age 45-54
Exceptional
84.1%
Tragic
82.0%

Chinese vs Subsaharan African Family Structure

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Chinese and Subsaharan African communities in the United States are seen in single mother households (5.2% compared to 7.8%, a difference of 51.2%), single father households (2.0% compared to 2.4%, a difference of 23.8%), and births to unmarried women (30.2% compared to 36.7%, a difference of 21.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of average family size (3.34 compared to 3.25, a difference of 2.8%), family households with children (26.0% compared to 27.6%, a difference of 6.0%), and family households (68.1% compared to 62.1%, a difference of 9.8%).
Chinese vs Subsaharan African Family Structure
Family Structure MetricChineseSubsaharan African
Family Households
Exceptional
68.1%
Tragic
62.1%
Family Households with Children
Tragic
26.0%
Good
27.6%
Married-couple Households
Exceptional
50.4%
Tragic
41.6%
Average Family Size
Exceptional
3.34
Excellent
3.25
Single Father Households
Exceptional
2.0%
Tragic
2.4%
Single Mother Households
Exceptional
5.2%
Tragic
7.8%
Currently Married
Exceptional
49.5%
Tragic
42.6%
Divorced or Separated
Exceptional
11.2%
Tragic
12.7%
Births to Unmarried Women
Excellent
30.2%
Tragic
36.7%

Chinese vs Subsaharan African Vehicle Availability

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Chinese and Subsaharan African communities in the United States are seen in 4 or more vehicles in household (8.8% compared to 5.7%, a difference of 55.0%), no vehicles in household (8.2% compared to 12.2%, a difference of 48.5%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (23.9% compared to 17.9%, a difference of 33.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (91.9% compared to 87.9%, a difference of 4.5%), 2 or more vehicles in household (60.1% compared to 51.9%, a difference of 15.8%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (23.9% compared to 17.9%, a difference of 33.7%).
Chinese vs Subsaharan African Vehicle Availability
Vehicle Availability MetricChineseSubsaharan African
No Vehicles Available
Exceptional
8.2%
Tragic
12.2%
1+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
91.9%
Tragic
87.9%
2+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
60.1%
Tragic
51.9%
3+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
23.9%
Tragic
17.9%
4+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
8.8%
Tragic
5.7%

Chinese vs Subsaharan African Education Level

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Chinese and Subsaharan African communities in the United States are seen in no schooling completed (1.5% compared to 2.3%, a difference of 56.3%), associate's degree (48.5% compared to 43.9%, a difference of 10.6%), and professional degree (4.5% compared to 4.1%, a difference of 8.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of doctorate degree (1.8% compared to 1.8%, a difference of 0.0%), nursery school (98.6% compared to 97.7%, a difference of 0.85%), and kindergarten (98.5% compared to 97.7%, a difference of 0.86%).
Chinese vs Subsaharan African Education Level
Education Level MetricChineseSubsaharan African
No Schooling Completed
Exceptional
1.5%
Tragic
2.3%
Nursery School
Exceptional
98.6%
Tragic
97.7%
Kindergarten
Exceptional
98.5%
Tragic
97.7%
1st Grade
Exceptional
98.5%
Tragic
97.7%
2nd Grade
Exceptional
98.5%
Tragic
97.6%
3rd Grade
Exceptional
98.4%
Tragic
97.5%
4th Grade
Exceptional
98.3%
Tragic
97.2%
5th Grade
Exceptional
98.1%
Tragic
97.0%
6th Grade
Exceptional
97.9%
Tragic
96.7%
7th Grade
Exceptional
97.1%
Tragic
95.7%
8th Grade
Exceptional
96.9%
Tragic
95.3%
9th Grade
Exceptional
96.3%
Tragic
94.4%
10th Grade
Exceptional
95.5%
Tragic
93.1%
11th Grade
Exceptional
94.6%
Tragic
91.7%
12th Grade, No Diploma
Exceptional
93.6%
Tragic
90.1%
High School Diploma
Exceptional
92.0%
Tragic
87.9%
GED/Equivalency
Exceptional
89.0%
Tragic
84.2%
College, Under 1 year
Exceptional
68.3%
Tragic
63.2%
College, 1 year or more
Exceptional
62.2%
Tragic
57.3%
Associate's Degree
Exceptional
48.5%
Tragic
43.9%
Bachelor's Degree
Good
38.5%
Tragic
35.8%
Master's Degree
Fair
14.6%
Poor
14.2%
Professional Degree
Average
4.5%
Poor
4.1%
Doctorate Degree
Fair
1.8%
Fair
1.8%

Chinese vs Subsaharan African Disability

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Chinese and Subsaharan African communities in the United States are seen in disability age 5 to 17 (4.7% compared to 6.2%, a difference of 31.2%), hearing disability (3.7% compared to 2.9%, a difference of 27.7%), and disability age 35 to 64 (10.3% compared to 12.6%, a difference of 22.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of self-care disability (2.6% compared to 2.6%, a difference of 0.37%), disability (12.2% compared to 12.3%, a difference of 0.42%), and ambulatory disability (6.5% compared to 6.4%, a difference of 1.0%).
Chinese vs Subsaharan African Disability
Disability MetricChineseSubsaharan African
Disability
Tragic
12.2%
Tragic
12.3%
Males
Tragic
12.1%
Tragic
11.8%
Females
Fair
12.3%
Tragic
12.7%
Age | Under 5 years
Exceptional
1.1%
Tragic
1.3%
Age | 5 to 17 years
Exceptional
4.7%
Tragic
6.2%
Age | 18 to 34 years
Exceptional
6.3%
Tragic
7.1%
Age | 35 to 64 years
Exceptional
10.3%
Tragic
12.6%
Age | 65 to 74 years
Exceptional
21.7%
Tragic
25.1%
Age | Over 75 years
Tragic
48.7%
Tragic
48.2%
Vision
Exceptional
2.0%
Tragic
2.3%
Hearing
Tragic
3.7%
Excellent
2.9%
Cognitive
Exceptional
15.9%
Tragic
18.5%
Ambulatory
Tragic
6.5%
Tragic
6.4%
Self-Care
Tragic
2.6%
Tragic
2.6%