Ecuadorian vs Immigrants from Western Asia Community Comparison

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 283,081,732 people shows a moderate negative correlation between the proportion of Immigrants from Western Asia within Ecuadorian communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of -0.497. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Ecuadorians within a typical geography, there is a decrease of 0.024% in Immigrants from Western Asia. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Ecuadorians corresponds to a decrease of 23.7 Immigrants from Western Asia.

When considering income, the most significant differences between Ecuadorian and Immigrants from Western Asia communities in the United States are seen in wage/income gap (22.9% compared to 26.3%, a difference of 14.8%), median family income ($95,114 compared to $108,691, a difference of 14.3%), and householder income over 65 years ($54,958 compared to $62,645, a difference of 14.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of householder income under 25 years ($53,911 compared to $52,190, a difference of 3.3%), median female earnings ($39,117 compared to $41,375, a difference of 5.8%), and householder income ages 25 - 44 years ($91,574 compared to $99,516, a difference of 8.7%).

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Ecuadorian and Immigrants from Western Asia communities in the United States are seen in receiving food stamps (14.9% compared to 11.6%, a difference of 27.9%), seniors poverty over the age of 65 (14.0% compared to 11.4%, a difference of 23.0%), and seniors poverty over the age of 75 (15.7% compared to 12.9%, a difference of 21.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of single male poverty (12.5% compared to 12.5%, a difference of 0.26%), single father poverty (16.5% compared to 16.0%, a difference of 2.9%), and female poverty among 18-24 year olds (19.1% compared to 20.3%, a difference of 6.2%).

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Ecuadorian and Immigrants from Western Asia communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among women with children under 18 years (6.5% compared to 5.6%, a difference of 15.9%), unemployment among women with children ages 6 to 17 years (10.0% compared to 8.7%, a difference of 15.2%), and unemployment among ages 60 to 64 years (5.8% compared to 5.0%, a difference of 15.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among seniors over 75 years (8.6% compared to 9.0%, a difference of 4.4%), unemployment among women with children under 6 years (7.9% compared to 7.5%, a difference of 4.9%), and unemployment among ages 65 to 74 years (5.8% compared to 5.4%, a difference of 6.9%).

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Ecuadorian and Immigrants from Western Asia communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (31.4% compared to 34.8%, a difference of 10.8%), in labor force | age 20-24 (72.4% compared to 73.5%, a difference of 1.6%), and in labor force | age > 16 (65.6% compared to 65.3%, a difference of 0.61%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 30-34 (84.4% compared to 84.3%, a difference of 0.11%), in labor force | age 20-64 (79.4% compared to 79.2%, a difference of 0.18%), and in labor force | age 45-54 (82.3% compared to 82.4%, a difference of 0.21%).

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Ecuadorian and Immigrants from Western Asia communities in the United States are seen in single mother households (7.2% compared to 5.7%, a difference of 25.7%), births to unmarried women (33.3% compared to 27.2%, a difference of 22.2%), and single father households (2.4% compared to 2.1%, a difference of 15.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of family households with children (27.8% compared to 27.9%, a difference of 0.21%), family households (65.0% compared to 64.1%, a difference of 1.4%), and average family size (3.32 compared to 3.26, a difference of 1.8%).

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Ecuadorian and Immigrants from Western Asia communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (22.8% compared to 11.0%, a difference of 105.9%), 4 or more vehicles in household (4.5% compared to 5.9%, a difference of 32.8%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (14.1% compared to 18.4%, a difference of 30.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (77.9% compared to 89.0%, a difference of 14.2%), 2 or more vehicles in household (42.0% compared to 54.1%, a difference of 28.9%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (14.1% compared to 18.4%, a difference of 30.9%).

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Ecuadorian and Immigrants from Western Asia communities in the United States are seen in doctorate degree (1.5% compared to 2.2%, a difference of 54.0%), professional degree (3.9% compared to 5.4%, a difference of 38.0%), and no schooling completed (3.0% compared to 2.3%, a difference of 26.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of nursery school (97.1% compared to 97.7%, a difference of 0.64%), kindergarten (97.0% compared to 97.7%, a difference of 0.65%), and 1st grade (97.0% compared to 97.6%, a difference of 0.65%).

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Ecuadorian and Immigrants from Western Asia communities in the United States are seen in hearing disability (2.5% compared to 2.9%, a difference of 14.1%), vision disability (2.3% compared to 2.0%, a difference of 11.2%), and disability age 5 to 17 (5.5% compared to 5.1%, a difference of 8.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of disability (11.2% compared to 11.2%, a difference of 0.040%), cognitive disability (17.2% compared to 17.4%, a difference of 0.90%), and disability age under 5 (1.1% compared to 1.1%, a difference of 1.1%).