Ecuadorian vs Chinese Community Comparison
COMPARE
Ecuadorian
Chinese
Social Comparison
Social Comparison
Ecuadorians
Chinese
2,199
SOCIAL INDEX
19.5/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
267th/ 347
SOCIAL RANK
9,296
SOCIAL INDEX
90.4/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
23rd/ 347
SOCIAL RANK
Chinese Integration in Ecuadorian Communities
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 56,452,513 people shows a substantial positive correlation between the proportion of Chinese within Ecuadorian communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.556. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Ecuadorians within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.048% in Chinese. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Ecuadorians corresponds to an increase of 48.5 Chinese.
Ecuadorian vs Chinese Income
When considering income, the most significant differences between Ecuadorian and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in householder income over 65 years ($54,958 compared to $77,465, a difference of 40.9%), householder income ages 45 - 64 years ($93,739 compared to $116,156, a difference of 23.9%), and median family income ($95,114 compared to $116,188, a difference of 22.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of median female earnings ($39,117 compared to $41,461, a difference of 6.0%), householder income under 25 years ($53,911 compared to $58,162, a difference of 7.9%), and median earnings ($45,214 compared to $48,836, a difference of 8.0%).
Income Metric | Ecuadorian | Chinese |
Per Capita Income | Poor $41,958 | Exceptional $46,098 |
Median Family Income | Tragic $95,114 | Exceptional $116,188 |
Median Household Income | Poor $82,070 | Exceptional $98,496 |
Median Earnings | Poor $45,214 | Exceptional $48,836 |
Median Male Earnings | Tragic $51,596 | Exceptional $56,872 |
Median Female Earnings | Fair $39,117 | Exceptional $41,461 |
Householder Age | Under 25 years | Exceptional $53,911 | Exceptional $58,162 |
Householder Age | 25 - 44 years | Poor $91,574 | Exceptional $104,264 |
Householder Age | 45 - 64 years | Tragic $93,739 | Exceptional $116,156 |
Householder Age | Over 65 years | Tragic $54,958 | Exceptional $77,465 |
Wage/Income Gap | Exceptional 22.9% | Average 25.9% |
Ecuadorian vs Chinese Poverty
When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Ecuadorian and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in married-couple family poverty (6.5% compared to 3.6%, a difference of 78.5%), seniors poverty over the age of 75 (15.7% compared to 9.1%, a difference of 73.6%), and seniors poverty over the age of 65 (14.0% compared to 8.3%, a difference of 68.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of single father poverty (16.5% compared to 15.4%, a difference of 7.1%), single male poverty (12.5% compared to 11.0%, a difference of 13.8%), and female poverty among 18-24 year olds (19.1% compared to 16.2%, a difference of 18.4%).
Poverty Metric | Ecuadorian | Chinese |
Poverty | Tragic 14.0% | Exceptional 9.5% |
Families | Tragic 10.8% | Exceptional 6.5% |
Males | Tragic 12.7% | Exceptional 8.7% |
Females | Tragic 15.3% | Exceptional 10.4% |
Females 18 to 24 years | Exceptional 19.1% | Exceptional 16.2% |
Females 25 to 34 years | Tragic 14.3% | Exceptional 11.0% |
Children Under 5 years | Tragic 19.2% | Exceptional 13.1% |
Children Under 16 years | Tragic 19.0% | Exceptional 11.9% |
Boys Under 16 years | Tragic 19.3% | Exceptional 11.9% |
Girls Under 16 years | Tragic 18.8% | Exceptional 12.3% |
Single Males | Excellent 12.5% | Exceptional 11.0% |
Single Females | Poor 21.6% | Exceptional 16.1% |
Single Fathers | Fair 16.5% | Exceptional 15.4% |
Single Mothers | Tragic 30.8% | Exceptional 24.6% |
Married Couples | Tragic 6.5% | Exceptional 3.6% |
Seniors Over 65 years | Tragic 14.0% | Exceptional 8.3% |
Seniors Over 75 years | Tragic 15.7% | Exceptional 9.1% |
Receiving Food Stamps | Tragic 14.9% | Exceptional 9.8% |
Ecuadorian vs Chinese Unemployment
When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Ecuadorian and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among seniors over 75 years (8.6% compared to 5.9%, a difference of 45.4%), unemployment among ages 60 to 64 years (5.8% compared to 4.0%, a difference of 43.9%), and female unemployment (6.3% compared to 4.5%, a difference of 39.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among women with children ages 6 to 17 years (10.0% compared to 9.3%, a difference of 8.3%), unemployment among women with children under 6 years (7.9% compared to 6.8%, a difference of 16.3%), and unemployment among ages 25 to 29 years (7.4% compared to 6.1%, a difference of 21.3%).
Unemployment Metric | Ecuadorian | Chinese |
Unemployment | Tragic 6.2% | Exceptional 4.7% |
Males | Tragic 6.2% | Exceptional 4.9% |
Females | Tragic 6.3% | Exceptional 4.5% |
Youth < 25 | Tragic 13.3% | Exceptional 10.7% |
Age | 16 to 19 years | Tragic 20.5% | Exceptional 16.0% |
Age | 20 to 24 years | Tragic 11.8% | Exceptional 9.4% |
Age | 25 to 29 years | Tragic 7.4% | Exceptional 6.1% |
Age | 30 to 34 years | Tragic 6.3% | Exceptional 5.1% |
Age | 35 to 44 years | Tragic 5.4% | Exceptional 4.3% |
Age | 45 to 54 years | Tragic 5.3% | Exceptional 4.0% |
Age | 55 to 59 years | Tragic 5.6% | Exceptional 4.4% |
Age | 60 to 64 years | Tragic 5.8% | Exceptional 4.0% |
Age | 65 to 74 years | Tragic 5.8% | Exceptional 4.4% |
Seniors > 65 | Tragic 5.6% | Exceptional 4.2% |
Seniors > 75 | Good 8.6% | Exceptional 5.9% |
Women w/ Children < 6 | Poor 7.9% | Exceptional 6.8% |
Women w/ Children 6 to 17 | Tragic 10.0% | Tragic 9.3% |
Women w/ Children < 18 | Tragic 6.5% | Exceptional 4.9% |
Ecuadorian vs Chinese Labor Participation
When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Ecuadorian and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (31.4% compared to 38.6%, a difference of 23.0%), in labor force | age 20-24 (72.4% compared to 77.3%, a difference of 6.7%), and in labor force | age 45-54 (82.3% compared to 84.1%, a difference of 2.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 25-29 (84.4% compared to 84.3%, a difference of 0.030%), in labor force | age 30-34 (84.4% compared to 85.0%, a difference of 0.70%), and in labor force | age 35-44 (84.2% compared to 85.1%, a difference of 1.0%).
Labor Participation Metric | Ecuadorian | Chinese |
In Labor Force | Age > 16 | Exceptional 65.6% | Tragic 64.7% |
In Labor Force | Age 20-64 | Fair 79.4% | Exceptional 80.7% |
In Labor Force | Age 16-19 | Tragic 31.4% | Exceptional 38.6% |
In Labor Force | Age 20-24 | Tragic 72.4% | Exceptional 77.3% |
In Labor Force | Age 25-29 | Poor 84.4% | Poor 84.3% |
In Labor Force | Age 30-34 | Poor 84.4% | Excellent 85.0% |
In Labor Force | Age 35-44 | Fair 84.2% | Exceptional 85.1% |
In Labor Force | Age 45-54 | Tragic 82.3% | Exceptional 84.1% |
Ecuadorian vs Chinese Family Structure
When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Ecuadorian and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in single mother households (7.2% compared to 5.2%, a difference of 39.4%), single father households (2.4% compared to 2.0%, a difference of 21.0%), and married-couple households (43.5% compared to 50.4%, a difference of 15.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of average family size (3.32 compared to 3.34, a difference of 0.71%), family households (65.0% compared to 68.1%, a difference of 4.9%), and divorced or separated (11.7% compared to 11.2%, a difference of 5.0%).
Family Structure Metric | Ecuadorian | Chinese |
Family Households | Exceptional 65.0% | Exceptional 68.1% |
Family Households with Children | Exceptional 27.8% | Tragic 26.0% |
Married-couple Households | Tragic 43.5% | Exceptional 50.4% |
Average Family Size | Exceptional 3.32 | Exceptional 3.34 |
Single Father Households | Fair 2.4% | Exceptional 2.0% |
Single Mother Households | Tragic 7.2% | Exceptional 5.2% |
Currently Married | Tragic 43.6% | Exceptional 49.5% |
Divorced or Separated | Exceptional 11.7% | Exceptional 11.2% |
Births to Unmarried Women | Poor 33.3% | Excellent 30.2% |
Ecuadorian vs Chinese Vehicle Availability
When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Ecuadorian and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (22.8% compared to 8.2%, a difference of 176.7%), 4 or more vehicles in household (4.5% compared to 8.8%, a difference of 98.2%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (14.1% compared to 23.9%, a difference of 69.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (77.9% compared to 91.9%, a difference of 17.8%), 2 or more vehicles in household (42.0% compared to 60.1%, a difference of 43.2%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (14.1% compared to 23.9%, a difference of 69.9%).
Vehicle Availability Metric | Ecuadorian | Chinese |
No Vehicles Available | Tragic 22.8% | Exceptional 8.2% |
1+ Vehicles Available | Tragic 77.9% | Exceptional 91.9% |
2+ Vehicles Available | Tragic 42.0% | Exceptional 60.1% |
3+ Vehicles Available | Tragic 14.1% | Exceptional 23.9% |
4+ Vehicles Available | Tragic 4.5% | Exceptional 8.8% |
Ecuadorian vs Chinese Education Level
When considering education level, the most significant differences between Ecuadorian and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in no schooling completed (3.0% compared to 1.5%, a difference of 100.6%), doctorate degree (1.5% compared to 1.8%, a difference of 21.0%), and college, under 1 year (59.3% compared to 68.3%, a difference of 15.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of nursery school (97.1% compared to 98.6%, a difference of 1.5%), kindergarten (97.0% compared to 98.5%, a difference of 1.5%), and 1st grade (97.0% compared to 98.5%, a difference of 1.6%).
Education Level Metric | Ecuadorian | Chinese |
No Schooling Completed | Tragic 3.0% | Exceptional 1.5% |
Nursery School | Tragic 97.1% | Exceptional 98.6% |
Kindergarten | Tragic 97.0% | Exceptional 98.5% |
1st Grade | Tragic 97.0% | Exceptional 98.5% |
2nd Grade | Tragic 96.9% | Exceptional 98.5% |
3rd Grade | Tragic 96.7% | Exceptional 98.4% |
4th Grade | Tragic 96.4% | Exceptional 98.3% |
5th Grade | Tragic 96.0% | Exceptional 98.1% |
6th Grade | Tragic 95.5% | Exceptional 97.9% |
7th Grade | Tragic 94.0% | Exceptional 97.1% |
8th Grade | Tragic 93.6% | Exceptional 96.9% |
9th Grade | Tragic 91.9% | Exceptional 96.3% |
10th Grade | Tragic 90.6% | Exceptional 95.5% |
11th Grade | Tragic 89.6% | Exceptional 94.6% |
12th Grade, No Diploma | Tragic 88.0% | Exceptional 93.6% |
High School Diploma | Tragic 85.1% | Exceptional 92.0% |
GED/Equivalency | Tragic 81.7% | Exceptional 89.0% |
College, Under 1 year | Tragic 59.3% | Exceptional 68.3% |
College, 1 year or more | Tragic 54.3% | Exceptional 62.2% |
Associate's Degree | Tragic 43.0% | Exceptional 48.5% |
Bachelor's Degree | Tragic 35.4% | Good 38.5% |
Master's Degree | Poor 14.0% | Fair 14.6% |
Professional Degree | Tragic 3.9% | Average 4.5% |
Doctorate Degree | Tragic 1.5% | Fair 1.8% |
Ecuadorian vs Chinese Disability
When considering disability, the most significant differences between Ecuadorian and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in hearing disability (2.5% compared to 3.7%, a difference of 46.7%), disability age 5 to 17 (5.5% compared to 4.7%, a difference of 17.2%), and male disability (10.5% compared to 12.1%, a difference of 15.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of self-care disability (2.6% compared to 2.6%, a difference of 0.57%), disability age over 75 (47.4% compared to 48.7%, a difference of 2.9%), and disability age 35 to 64 (10.7% compared to 10.3%, a difference of 3.7%).
Disability Metric | Ecuadorian | Chinese |
Disability | Exceptional 11.2% | Tragic 12.2% |
Males | Exceptional 10.5% | Tragic 12.1% |
Females | Exceptional 11.9% | Fair 12.3% |
Age | Under 5 years | Exceptional 1.1% | Exceptional 1.1% |
Age | 5 to 17 years | Good 5.5% | Exceptional 4.7% |
Age | 18 to 34 years | Exceptional 5.8% | Exceptional 6.3% |
Age | 35 to 64 years | Exceptional 10.7% | Exceptional 10.3% |
Age | 65 to 74 years | Fair 23.6% | Exceptional 21.7% |
Age | Over 75 years | Average 47.4% | Tragic 48.7% |
Vision | Tragic 2.3% | Exceptional 2.0% |
Hearing | Exceptional 2.5% | Tragic 3.7% |
Cognitive | Average 17.2% | Exceptional 15.9% |
Ambulatory | Good 6.1% | Tragic 6.5% |
Self-Care | Tragic 2.6% | Tragic 2.6% |