Ecuadorian vs Chickasaw Community Comparison
COMPARE
Ecuadorian
Chickasaw
Social Comparison
Social Comparison
Ecuadorians
Chickasaw
2,199
SOCIAL INDEX
19.5/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
267th/ 347
SOCIAL RANK
3,663
SOCIAL INDEX
34.2/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
212th/ 347
SOCIAL RANK
Chickasaw Integration in Ecuadorian Communities
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 112,235,087 people shows a slight positive correlation between the proportion of Chickasaw within Ecuadorian communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.097. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Ecuadorians within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.001% in Chickasaw. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Ecuadorians corresponds to an increase of 0.8 Chickasaw.
Ecuadorian vs Chickasaw Income
When considering income, the most significant differences between Ecuadorian and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in householder income under 25 years ($53,911 compared to $44,763, a difference of 20.4%), wage/income gap (22.9% compared to 27.2%, a difference of 18.6%), and householder income ages 25 - 44 years ($91,574 compared to $77,929, a difference of 17.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of householder income over 65 years ($54,958 compared to $53,732, a difference of 2.3%), median male earnings ($51,596 compared to $47,832, a difference of 7.9%), and median earnings ($45,214 compared to $40,672, a difference of 11.2%).
Income Metric | Ecuadorian | Chickasaw |
Per Capita Income | Poor $41,958 | Tragic $36,475 |
Median Family Income | Tragic $95,114 | Tragic $85,356 |
Median Household Income | Poor $82,070 | Tragic $70,005 |
Median Earnings | Poor $45,214 | Tragic $40,672 |
Median Male Earnings | Tragic $51,596 | Tragic $47,832 |
Median Female Earnings | Fair $39,117 | Tragic $34,414 |
Householder Age | Under 25 years | Exceptional $53,911 | Tragic $44,763 |
Householder Age | 25 - 44 years | Poor $91,574 | Tragic $77,929 |
Householder Age | 45 - 64 years | Tragic $93,739 | Tragic $82,193 |
Householder Age | Over 65 years | Tragic $54,958 | Tragic $53,732 |
Wage/Income Gap | Exceptional 22.9% | Tragic 27.2% |
Ecuadorian vs Chickasaw Poverty
When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Ecuadorian and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in seniors poverty over the age of 75 (15.7% compared to 11.6%, a difference of 35.3%), seniors poverty over the age of 65 (14.0% compared to 10.7%, a difference of 31.1%), and single male poverty (12.5% compared to 16.3%, a difference of 30.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of family poverty (10.8% compared to 10.8%, a difference of 0.64%), child poverty among boys under 16 (19.3% compared to 19.8%, a difference of 2.5%), and child poverty under the age of 16 (19.0% compared to 19.5%, a difference of 2.7%).
Poverty Metric | Ecuadorian | Chickasaw |
Poverty | Tragic 14.0% | Tragic 14.7% |
Families | Tragic 10.8% | Tragic 10.8% |
Males | Tragic 12.7% | Tragic 13.5% |
Females | Tragic 15.3% | Tragic 15.9% |
Females 18 to 24 years | Exceptional 19.1% | Tragic 24.5% |
Females 25 to 34 years | Tragic 14.3% | Tragic 17.0% |
Children Under 5 years | Tragic 19.2% | Tragic 21.8% |
Children Under 16 years | Tragic 19.0% | Tragic 19.5% |
Boys Under 16 years | Tragic 19.3% | Tragic 19.8% |
Girls Under 16 years | Tragic 18.8% | Tragic 19.6% |
Single Males | Excellent 12.5% | Tragic 16.3% |
Single Females | Poor 21.6% | Tragic 26.3% |
Single Fathers | Fair 16.5% | Tragic 19.0% |
Single Mothers | Tragic 30.8% | Tragic 34.4% |
Married Couples | Tragic 6.5% | Tragic 5.8% |
Seniors Over 65 years | Tragic 14.0% | Good 10.7% |
Seniors Over 75 years | Tragic 15.7% | Exceptional 11.6% |
Receiving Food Stamps | Tragic 14.9% | Tragic 13.1% |
Ecuadorian vs Chickasaw Unemployment
When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Ecuadorian and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among ages 60 to 64 years (5.8% compared to 4.3%, a difference of 33.1%), unemployment among seniors over 65 years (5.6% compared to 4.4%, a difference of 27.1%), and unemployment among ages 45 to 54 years (5.3% compared to 4.2%, a difference of 24.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among ages 30 to 34 years (6.3% compared to 6.2%, a difference of 1.3%), unemployment among ages 25 to 29 years (7.4% compared to 6.7%, a difference of 9.5%), and unemployment among ages 35 to 44 years (5.4% compared to 4.9%, a difference of 9.5%).
Unemployment Metric | Ecuadorian | Chickasaw |
Unemployment | Tragic 6.2% | Exceptional 5.0% |
Males | Tragic 6.2% | Excellent 5.2% |
Females | Tragic 6.3% | Excellent 5.1% |
Youth < 25 | Tragic 13.3% | Exceptional 11.2% |
Age | 16 to 19 years | Tragic 20.5% | Exceptional 16.7% |
Age | 20 to 24 years | Tragic 11.8% | Exceptional 9.9% |
Age | 25 to 29 years | Tragic 7.4% | Fair 6.7% |
Age | 30 to 34 years | Tragic 6.3% | Tragic 6.2% |
Age | 35 to 44 years | Tragic 5.4% | Tragic 4.9% |
Age | 45 to 54 years | Tragic 5.3% | Exceptional 4.2% |
Age | 55 to 59 years | Tragic 5.6% | Good 4.8% |
Age | 60 to 64 years | Tragic 5.8% | Exceptional 4.3% |
Age | 65 to 74 years | Tragic 5.8% | Exceptional 4.7% |
Seniors > 65 | Tragic 5.6% | Exceptional 4.4% |
Seniors > 75 | Good 8.6% | Exceptional 7.3% |
Women w/ Children < 6 | Poor 7.9% | Tragic 9.0% |
Women w/ Children 6 to 17 | Tragic 10.0% | Exceptional 8.6% |
Women w/ Children < 18 | Tragic 6.5% | Good 5.4% |
Ecuadorian vs Chickasaw Labor Participation
When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Ecuadorian and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (31.4% compared to 38.3%, a difference of 22.1%), in labor force | age > 16 (65.6% compared to 62.3%, a difference of 5.4%), and in labor force | age 20-64 (79.4% compared to 76.2%, a difference of 4.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 20-24 (72.4% compared to 74.5%, a difference of 2.8%), in labor force | age 30-34 (84.4% compared to 81.9%, a difference of 3.0%), and in labor force | age 25-29 (84.4% compared to 81.9%, a difference of 3.1%).
Labor Participation Metric | Ecuadorian | Chickasaw |
In Labor Force | Age > 16 | Exceptional 65.6% | Tragic 62.3% |
In Labor Force | Age 20-64 | Fair 79.4% | Tragic 76.2% |
In Labor Force | Age 16-19 | Tragic 31.4% | Exceptional 38.3% |
In Labor Force | Age 20-24 | Tragic 72.4% | Poor 74.5% |
In Labor Force | Age 25-29 | Poor 84.4% | Tragic 81.9% |
In Labor Force | Age 30-34 | Poor 84.4% | Tragic 81.9% |
In Labor Force | Age 35-44 | Fair 84.2% | Tragic 80.9% |
In Labor Force | Age 45-54 | Tragic 82.3% | Tragic 79.0% |
Ecuadorian vs Chickasaw Family Structure
When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Ecuadorian and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in divorced or separated (11.7% compared to 14.2%, a difference of 21.0%), single father households (2.4% compared to 2.8%, a difference of 15.3%), and births to unmarried women (33.3% compared to 36.3%, a difference of 9.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of family households (65.0% compared to 64.4%, a difference of 0.86%), family households with children (27.8% compared to 28.2%, a difference of 1.5%), and single mother households (7.2% compared to 7.0%, a difference of 2.2%).
Family Structure Metric | Ecuadorian | Chickasaw |
Family Households | Exceptional 65.0% | Good 64.4% |
Family Households with Children | Exceptional 27.8% | Exceptional 28.2% |
Married-couple Households | Tragic 43.5% | Fair 45.9% |
Average Family Size | Exceptional 3.32 | Tragic 3.19 |
Single Father Households | Fair 2.4% | Tragic 2.8% |
Single Mother Households | Tragic 7.2% | Tragic 7.0% |
Currently Married | Tragic 43.6% | Average 46.6% |
Divorced or Separated | Exceptional 11.7% | Tragic 14.2% |
Births to Unmarried Women | Poor 33.3% | Tragic 36.3% |
Ecuadorian vs Chickasaw Vehicle Availability
When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Ecuadorian and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (22.8% compared to 7.9%, a difference of 189.5%), 4 or more vehicles in household (4.5% compared to 7.4%, a difference of 66.6%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (14.1% compared to 22.2%, a difference of 58.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (77.9% compared to 92.3%, a difference of 18.4%), 2 or more vehicles in household (42.0% compared to 59.0%, a difference of 40.6%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (14.1% compared to 22.2%, a difference of 58.0%).
Vehicle Availability Metric | Ecuadorian | Chickasaw |
No Vehicles Available | Tragic 22.8% | Exceptional 7.9% |
1+ Vehicles Available | Tragic 77.9% | Exceptional 92.3% |
2+ Vehicles Available | Tragic 42.0% | Exceptional 59.0% |
3+ Vehicles Available | Tragic 14.1% | Exceptional 22.2% |
4+ Vehicles Available | Tragic 4.5% | Exceptional 7.4% |
Ecuadorian vs Chickasaw Education Level
When considering education level, the most significant differences between Ecuadorian and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in no schooling completed (3.0% compared to 1.7%, a difference of 74.4%), master's degree (14.0% compared to 11.4%, a difference of 22.5%), and professional degree (3.9% compared to 3.4%, a difference of 16.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of nursery school (97.1% compared to 98.4%, a difference of 1.3%), kindergarten (97.0% compared to 98.4%, a difference of 1.4%), and 1st grade (97.0% compared to 98.3%, a difference of 1.4%).
Education Level Metric | Ecuadorian | Chickasaw |
No Schooling Completed | Tragic 3.0% | Exceptional 1.7% |
Nursery School | Tragic 97.1% | Exceptional 98.4% |
Kindergarten | Tragic 97.0% | Exceptional 98.4% |
1st Grade | Tragic 97.0% | Exceptional 98.3% |
2nd Grade | Tragic 96.9% | Exceptional 98.3% |
3rd Grade | Tragic 96.7% | Exceptional 98.2% |
4th Grade | Tragic 96.4% | Exceptional 98.0% |
5th Grade | Tragic 96.0% | Exceptional 97.9% |
6th Grade | Tragic 95.5% | Exceptional 97.6% |
7th Grade | Tragic 94.0% | Exceptional 96.7% |
8th Grade | Tragic 93.6% | Exceptional 96.4% |
9th Grade | Tragic 91.9% | Exceptional 95.5% |
10th Grade | Tragic 90.6% | Excellent 94.1% |
11th Grade | Tragic 89.6% | Fair 92.3% |
12th Grade, No Diploma | Tragic 88.0% | Tragic 90.3% |
High School Diploma | Tragic 85.1% | Poor 88.4% |
GED/Equivalency | Tragic 81.7% | Tragic 83.8% |
College, Under 1 year | Tragic 59.3% | Tragic 60.4% |
College, 1 year or more | Tragic 54.3% | Tragic 53.3% |
Associate's Degree | Tragic 43.0% | Tragic 38.6% |
Bachelor's Degree | Tragic 35.4% | Tragic 30.4% |
Master's Degree | Poor 14.0% | Tragic 11.4% |
Professional Degree | Tragic 3.9% | Tragic 3.4% |
Doctorate Degree | Tragic 1.5% | Tragic 1.5% |
Ecuadorian vs Chickasaw Disability
When considering disability, the most significant differences between Ecuadorian and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in hearing disability (2.5% compared to 4.5%, a difference of 78.4%), disability age under 5 (1.1% compared to 1.7%, a difference of 59.1%), and disability age 18 to 34 (5.8% compared to 9.0%, a difference of 54.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of cognitive disability (17.2% compared to 18.5%, a difference of 7.3%), disability age over 75 (47.4% compared to 51.2%, a difference of 8.1%), and self-care disability (2.6% compared to 2.9%, a difference of 11.9%).
Disability Metric | Ecuadorian | Chickasaw |
Disability | Exceptional 11.2% | Tragic 15.2% |
Males | Exceptional 10.5% | Tragic 15.1% |
Females | Exceptional 11.9% | Tragic 15.2% |
Age | Under 5 years | Exceptional 1.1% | Tragic 1.7% |
Age | 5 to 17 years | Good 5.5% | Tragic 6.8% |
Age | 18 to 34 years | Exceptional 5.8% | Tragic 9.0% |
Age | 35 to 64 years | Exceptional 10.7% | Tragic 16.1% |
Age | 65 to 74 years | Fair 23.6% | Tragic 30.2% |
Age | Over 75 years | Average 47.4% | Tragic 51.2% |
Vision | Tragic 2.3% | Tragic 3.2% |
Hearing | Exceptional 2.5% | Tragic 4.5% |
Cognitive | Average 17.2% | Tragic 18.5% |
Ambulatory | Good 6.1% | Tragic 8.0% |
Self-Care | Tragic 2.6% | Tragic 2.9% |