Creek vs Ecuadorian Community Comparison

COMPARE

Creek
Race
Ancestry
AfghanAfricanAlaska NativeAlaskan AthabascanAlbanianAleutAlsatianAmericanApacheArabArapahoArgentineanArmenianAssyrian/Chaldean/SyriacAustralianAustrianBahamianBangladeshiBarbadianBasqueBelgianBelizeanBermudanBhutaneseBlackfeetBolivianBrazilianBritishBritish West IndianBulgarianBurmeseCajunCambodianCanadianCape VerdeanCarpatho RusynCelticCentral AmericanCentral American IndianCherokeeCheyenneChickasawChileanChineseChippewaChoctawColombianColvilleComancheCosta RicanCreeCreekCroatianCrowCubanCypriotCzechCzechoslovakianDanishDelawareDominicanDutchDutch West IndianEastern EuropeanEgyptianEnglishEstonianEthiopianEuropeanFijianFilipinoFinnishFrenchFrench 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 LankaSt. Vincent and the GrenadinesSudanSwedenSwitzerlandSyriaTaiwanThailandTrinidad and TobagoTurkeyUgandaUkraineUruguayUzbekistanVenezuelaVietnamWest IndiesWestern AfricaWestern AsiaWestern EuropeYemenZaireZimbabweAzores
Ecuadorian
Race
Ancestry
AfghanAfricanAlaska NativeAlaskan AthabascanAlbanianAleutAlsatianAmericanApacheArabArapahoArgentineanArmenianAssyrian/Chaldean/SyriacAustralianAustrianBahamianBangladeshiBarbadianBasqueBelgianBelizeanBermudanBhutaneseBlackfeetBolivianBrazilianBritishBritish West IndianBulgarianBurmeseCajunCambodianCanadianCape VerdeanCarpatho RusynCelticCentral AmericanCentral American IndianCherokeeCheyenneChickasawChileanChineseChippewaChoctawColombianColvilleComancheCosta RicanCreeCroatianCrowCubanCypriotCzechCzechoslovakianDanishDelawareDominicanDutchDutch 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 LankaSt. Vincent and the GrenadinesSudanSwedenSwitzerlandSyriaTaiwanThailandTrinidad and TobagoTurkeyUgandaUkraineUruguayUzbekistanVenezuelaVietnamWest IndiesWestern AfricaWestern AsiaWestern EuropeYemenZaireZimbabweAzores
Social Comparison
Social Comparison
Income
Poverty
Unemployment
Labor Participation
Family Structure
Vehicle Availability
Education Level
Disability

Social Comparison

Creek

Ecuadorians

Fair
Poor
2,959
SOCIAL INDEX
27.1/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
237th/ 347
SOCIAL RANK
2,199
SOCIAL INDEX
19.5/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
267th/ 347
SOCIAL RANK

Ecuadorian Integration in Creek Communities

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 133,454,973 people shows a moderate positive correlation between the proportion of Ecuadorians within Creek communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.477. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Creek within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.056% in Ecuadorians. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Creek corresponds to an increase of 55.8 Ecuadorians.
Creek Integration in Ecuadorian Communities

Creek vs Ecuadorian Income

When considering income, the most significant differences between Creek and Ecuadorian communities in the United States are seen in householder income ages 25 - 44 years ($74,847 compared to $91,574, a difference of 22.4%), median household income ($67,715 compared to $82,070, a difference of 21.2%), and householder income under 25 years ($45,371 compared to $53,911, a difference of 18.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of householder income over 65 years ($51,949 compared to $54,958, a difference of 5.8%), median male earnings ($46,594 compared to $51,596, a difference of 10.7%), and median earnings ($39,648 compared to $45,214, a difference of 14.0%).
Creek vs Ecuadorian Income
Income MetricCreekEcuadorian
Per Capita Income
Tragic
$35,546
Poor
$41,958
Median Family Income
Tragic
$82,560
Tragic
$95,114
Median Household Income
Tragic
$67,715
Poor
$82,070
Median Earnings
Tragic
$39,648
Poor
$45,214
Median Male Earnings
Tragic
$46,594
Tragic
$51,596
Median Female Earnings
Tragic
$33,437
Fair
$39,117
Householder Age | Under 25 years
Tragic
$45,371
Exceptional
$53,911
Householder Age | 25 - 44 years
Tragic
$74,847
Poor
$91,574
Householder Age | 45 - 64 years
Tragic
$78,960
Tragic
$93,739
Householder Age | Over 65 years
Tragic
$51,949
Tragic
$54,958
Wage/Income Gap
Tragic
27.1%
Exceptional
22.9%

Creek vs Ecuadorian Poverty

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Creek and Ecuadorian communities in the United States are seen in seniors poverty over the age of 75 (11.6% compared to 15.7%, a difference of 36.2%), single male poverty (16.8% compared to 12.5%, a difference of 34.8%), and female poverty among 25-34 year olds (19.2% compared to 14.3%, a difference of 33.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of receiving food stamps (14.1% compared to 14.9%, a difference of 5.2%), married-couple family poverty (6.2% compared to 6.5%, a difference of 5.5%), and family poverty (11.7% compared to 10.8%, a difference of 8.1%).
Creek vs Ecuadorian Poverty
Poverty MetricCreekEcuadorian
Poverty
Tragic
15.6%
Tragic
14.0%
Families
Tragic
11.7%
Tragic
10.8%
Males
Tragic
14.1%
Tragic
12.7%
Females
Tragic
17.0%
Tragic
15.3%
Females 18 to 24 years
Tragic
24.2%
Exceptional
19.1%
Females 25 to 34 years
Tragic
19.2%
Tragic
14.3%
Children Under 5 years
Tragic
24.2%
Tragic
19.2%
Children Under 16 years
Tragic
21.5%
Tragic
19.0%
Boys Under 16 years
Tragic
21.5%
Tragic
19.3%
Girls Under 16 years
Tragic
21.7%
Tragic
18.8%
Single Males
Tragic
16.8%
Excellent
12.5%
Single Females
Tragic
27.4%
Poor
21.6%
Single Fathers
Tragic
19.8%
Fair
16.5%
Single Mothers
Tragic
36.7%
Tragic
30.8%
Married Couples
Tragic
6.2%
Tragic
6.5%
Seniors Over 65 years
Average
10.9%
Tragic
14.0%
Seniors Over 75 years
Exceptional
11.6%
Tragic
15.7%
Receiving Food Stamps
Tragic
14.1%
Tragic
14.9%

Creek vs Ecuadorian Unemployment

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Creek and Ecuadorian communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among ages 60 to 64 years (4.6% compared to 5.8%, a difference of 24.5%), unemployment among ages 20 to 24 years (9.7% compared to 11.8%, a difference of 20.8%), and unemployment among seniors over 65 years (4.6% compared to 5.6%, a difference of 20.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among ages 35 to 44 years (5.4% compared to 5.4%, a difference of 0.62%), unemployment among ages 25 to 29 years (7.6% compared to 7.4%, a difference of 2.6%), and unemployment among ages 30 to 34 years (6.6% compared to 6.3%, a difference of 4.3%).
Creek vs Ecuadorian Unemployment
Unemployment MetricCreekEcuadorian
Unemployment
Poor
5.4%
Tragic
6.2%
Males
Tragic
5.6%
Tragic
6.2%
Females
Poor
5.4%
Tragic
6.3%
Youth < 25
Exceptional
11.2%
Tragic
13.3%
Age | 16 to 19 years
Excellent
17.2%
Tragic
20.5%
Age | 20 to 24 years
Exceptional
9.7%
Tragic
11.8%
Age | 25 to 29 years
Tragic
7.6%
Tragic
7.4%
Age | 30 to 34 years
Tragic
6.6%
Tragic
6.3%
Age | 35 to 44 years
Tragic
5.4%
Tragic
5.4%
Age | 45 to 54 years
Poor
4.6%
Tragic
5.3%
Age | 55 to 59 years
Poor
4.9%
Tragic
5.6%
Age | 60 to 64 years
Exceptional
4.6%
Tragic
5.8%
Age | 65 to 74 years
Exceptional
4.8%
Tragic
5.8%
Seniors > 65
Exceptional
4.6%
Tragic
5.6%
Seniors > 75
Exceptional
7.8%
Good
8.6%
Women w/ Children < 6
Tragic
8.9%
Poor
7.9%
Women w/ Children 6 to 17
Tragic
9.4%
Tragic
10.0%
Women w/ Children < 18
Tragic
5.8%
Tragic
6.5%

Creek vs Ecuadorian Labor Participation

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Creek and Ecuadorian communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (39.1% compared to 31.4%, a difference of 24.7%), in labor force | age > 16 (61.3% compared to 65.6%, a difference of 7.1%), and in labor force | age 45-54 (77.7% compared to 82.3%, a difference of 5.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 20-24 (74.5% compared to 72.4%, a difference of 2.9%), in labor force | age 25-29 (80.7% compared to 84.4%, a difference of 4.6%), and in labor force | age 30-34 (80.4% compared to 84.4%, a difference of 5.1%).
Creek vs Ecuadorian Labor Participation
Labor Participation MetricCreekEcuadorian
In Labor Force | Age > 16
Tragic
61.3%
Exceptional
65.6%
In Labor Force | Age 20-64
Tragic
75.1%
Fair
79.4%
In Labor Force | Age 16-19
Exceptional
39.1%
Tragic
31.4%
In Labor Force | Age 20-24
Poor
74.5%
Tragic
72.4%
In Labor Force | Age 25-29
Tragic
80.7%
Poor
84.4%
In Labor Force | Age 30-34
Tragic
80.4%
Poor
84.4%
In Labor Force | Age 35-44
Tragic
80.0%
Fair
84.2%
In Labor Force | Age 45-54
Tragic
77.7%
Tragic
82.3%

Creek vs Ecuadorian Family Structure

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Creek and Ecuadorian communities in the United States are seen in divorced or separated (14.4% compared to 11.7%, a difference of 22.7%), births to unmarried women (37.6% compared to 33.3%, a difference of 12.9%), and single father households (2.6% compared to 2.4%, a difference of 9.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of family households (64.2% compared to 65.0%, a difference of 1.3%), family households with children (27.4% compared to 27.8%, a difference of 1.5%), and single mother households (7.0% compared to 7.2%, a difference of 2.5%).
Creek vs Ecuadorian Family Structure
Family Structure MetricCreekEcuadorian
Family Households
Fair
64.2%
Exceptional
65.0%
Family Households with Children
Fair
27.4%
Exceptional
27.8%
Married-couple Households
Tragic
45.3%
Tragic
43.5%
Average Family Size
Poor
3.20
Exceptional
3.32
Single Father Households
Tragic
2.6%
Fair
2.4%
Single Mother Households
Tragic
7.0%
Tragic
7.2%
Currently Married
Poor
46.0%
Tragic
43.6%
Divorced or Separated
Tragic
14.4%
Exceptional
11.7%
Births to Unmarried Women
Tragic
37.6%
Poor
33.3%

Creek vs Ecuadorian Vehicle Availability

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Creek and Ecuadorian communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (7.8% compared to 22.8%, a difference of 192.5%), 4 or more vehicles in household (7.2% compared to 4.5%, a difference of 61.1%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (21.9% compared to 14.1%, a difference of 55.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (92.3% compared to 77.9%, a difference of 18.4%), 2 or more vehicles in household (58.3% compared to 42.0%, a difference of 38.8%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (21.9% compared to 14.1%, a difference of 55.9%).
Creek vs Ecuadorian Vehicle Availability
Vehicle Availability MetricCreekEcuadorian
No Vehicles Available
Exceptional
7.8%
Tragic
22.8%
1+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
92.3%
Tragic
77.9%
2+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
58.3%
Tragic
42.0%
3+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
21.9%
Tragic
14.1%
4+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
7.2%
Tragic
4.5%

Creek vs Ecuadorian Education Level

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Creek and Ecuadorian communities in the United States are seen in no schooling completed (1.6% compared to 3.0%, a difference of 80.3%), master's degree (10.5% compared to 14.0%, a difference of 33.1%), and professional degree (3.1% compared to 3.9%, a difference of 26.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of college, under 1 year (59.3% compared to 59.3%, a difference of 0.090%), nursery school (98.4% compared to 97.1%, a difference of 1.4%), and kindergarten (98.4% compared to 97.0%, a difference of 1.4%).
Creek vs Ecuadorian Education Level
Education Level MetricCreekEcuadorian
No Schooling Completed
Exceptional
1.6%
Tragic
3.0%
Nursery School
Exceptional
98.4%
Tragic
97.1%
Kindergarten
Exceptional
98.4%
Tragic
97.0%
1st Grade
Exceptional
98.4%
Tragic
97.0%
2nd Grade
Exceptional
98.3%
Tragic
96.9%
3rd Grade
Exceptional
98.2%
Tragic
96.7%
4th Grade
Exceptional
98.1%
Tragic
96.4%
5th Grade
Exceptional
98.0%
Tragic
96.0%
6th Grade
Exceptional
97.7%
Tragic
95.5%
7th Grade
Exceptional
96.9%
Tragic
94.0%
8th Grade
Exceptional
96.6%
Tragic
93.6%
9th Grade
Exceptional
95.6%
Tragic
91.9%
10th Grade
Exceptional
94.2%
Tragic
90.6%
11th Grade
Average
92.4%
Tragic
89.6%
12th Grade, No Diploma
Tragic
90.3%
Tragic
88.0%
High School Diploma
Tragic
88.3%
Tragic
85.1%
GED/Equivalency
Tragic
83.6%
Tragic
81.7%
College, Under 1 year
Tragic
59.3%
Tragic
59.3%
College, 1 year or more
Tragic
52.2%
Tragic
54.3%
Associate's Degree
Tragic
37.6%
Tragic
43.0%
Bachelor's Degree
Tragic
28.9%
Tragic
35.4%
Master's Degree
Tragic
10.5%
Poor
14.0%
Professional Degree
Tragic
3.1%
Tragic
3.9%
Doctorate Degree
Tragic
1.3%
Tragic
1.5%

Creek vs Ecuadorian Disability

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Creek and Ecuadorian communities in the United States are seen in hearing disability (4.4% compared to 2.5%, a difference of 74.1%), disability age 35 to 64 (16.9% compared to 10.7%, a difference of 58.1%), and disability age 18 to 34 (9.0% compared to 5.8%, a difference of 55.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of cognitive disability (18.3% compared to 17.2%, a difference of 6.0%), disability age over 75 (51.5% compared to 47.4%, a difference of 8.6%), and self-care disability (2.8% compared to 2.6%, a difference of 11.0%).
Creek vs Ecuadorian Disability
Disability MetricCreekEcuadorian
Disability
Tragic
15.6%
Exceptional
11.2%
Males
Tragic
15.5%
Exceptional
10.5%
Females
Tragic
15.7%
Exceptional
11.9%
Age | Under 5 years
Tragic
1.6%
Exceptional
1.1%
Age | 5 to 17 years
Tragic
6.9%
Good
5.5%
Age | 18 to 34 years
Tragic
9.0%
Exceptional
5.8%
Age | 35 to 64 years
Tragic
16.9%
Exceptional
10.7%
Age | 65 to 74 years
Tragic
30.2%
Fair
23.6%
Age | Over 75 years
Tragic
51.5%
Average
47.4%
Vision
Tragic
3.2%
Tragic
2.3%
Hearing
Tragic
4.4%
Exceptional
2.5%
Cognitive
Tragic
18.3%
Average
17.2%
Ambulatory
Tragic
8.5%
Good
6.1%
Self-Care
Tragic
2.8%
Tragic
2.6%