Ethiopian vs Chinese Community Comparison

COMPARE

Ethiopian
Race
Ancestry
AfghanAfricanAlaska NativeAlaskan AthabascanAlbanianAleutAlsatianAmericanApacheArabArapahoArgentineanArmenianAssyrian/Chaldean/SyriacAustralianAustrianBahamianBangladeshiBarbadianBasqueBelgianBelizeanBermudanBhutaneseBlackfeetBolivianBrazilianBritishBritish West IndianBulgarianBurmeseCajunCambodianCanadianCape VerdeanCarpatho RusynCelticCentral AmericanCentral American IndianCherokeeCheyenneChickasawChileanChippewaChoctawColombianColvilleComancheCosta RicanCreeCreekCroatianCubanCypriotCzechCzechoslovakianDanishDelawareDominicanDutchDutch West IndianEastern EuropeanEcuadorianEgyptianEnglishEstonianEthiopianEuropeanFijianFilipinoFinnishFrenchFrench American IndianFrench CanadianGermanGerman RussianGhanaianGreekGuamanian/ChamorroGuatemalanGuyaneseHaitianHmongHonduranHungarianIcelanderIndian (Asian)IndonesianInupiatIranianIraqiIrishIroquoisIsraeliItalianJamaicanJapaneseJordanianKenyanKiowaKoreanLaotianLatvianLebaneseLiberianLithuanianLuxembourgerMacedonianMalaysianMalteseMarshalleseMenomineeMexicanMexican 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 TobagonianTurkishU.S. Virgin IslanderUgandanUkrainianUruguayanVenezuelanVietnameseWelshWest IndianYakamaYaquiYugoslavianYumanYup'ikZimbabwean
Immigration
NonimmigrantsImmigrantsAfghanistanAfricaAlbaniaArgentinaArmeniaAsiaAustraliaAustriaBahamasBangladeshBarbadosBelarusBelgiumBelizeBoliviaBosnia and HerzegovinaBrazilBulgariaBurma/MyanmarCambodiaCameroonCanadaCaribbeanCentral 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
Chinese
Race
Ancestry
AfghanAfricanAlaska NativeAlaskan AthabascanAlbanianAleutAlsatianAmericanApacheArabArapahoArgentineanArmenianAssyrian/Chaldean/SyriacAustralianAustrianBahamianBangladeshiBarbadianBasqueBelgianBelizeanBermudanBhutaneseBlackfeetBolivianBrazilianBritishBritish West IndianBulgarianBurmeseCajunCambodianCanadianCape VerdeanCarpatho RusynCelticCentral AmericanCentral American IndianCherokeeCheyenneChickasawChileanChineseChippewaChoctawColombianColvilleComancheCosta RicanCreeCreekCroatianCrowCubanCypriotCzechCzechoslovakianDanishDelawareDominicanDutchDutch West IndianEastern EuropeanEcuadorianEgyptianEnglishEstonianEuropeanFijianFilipinoFinnishFrenchFrench 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

Ethiopians

Chinese

Good
Exceptional
7,266
SOCIAL INDEX
70.1/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
126th/ 347
SOCIAL RANK
9,296
SOCIAL INDEX
90.4/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
23rd/ 347
SOCIAL RANK

Chinese Integration in Ethiopian Communities

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 51,998,695 people shows a mild positive correlation between the proportion of Chinese within Ethiopian communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.312. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Ethiopians within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.014% in Chinese. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Ethiopians corresponds to an increase of 13.8 Chinese.
Ethiopian Integration in Chinese Communities

Ethiopian vs Chinese Income

When considering income, the most significant differences between Ethiopian and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in householder income over 65 years ($64,989 compared to $77,465, a difference of 19.2%), wage/income gap (21.8% compared to 25.9%, a difference of 18.6%), and householder income ages 45 - 64 years ($103,736 compared to $116,156, a difference of 12.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of per capita income ($46,569 compared to $46,098, a difference of 1.0%), median male earnings ($56,243 compared to $56,872, a difference of 1.1%), and median earnings ($49,572 compared to $48,836, a difference of 1.5%).
Ethiopian vs Chinese Income
Income MetricEthiopianChinese
Per Capita Income
Exceptional
$46,569
Exceptional
$46,098
Median Family Income
Exceptional
$108,251
Exceptional
$116,188
Median Household Income
Exceptional
$89,640
Exceptional
$98,496
Median Earnings
Exceptional
$49,572
Exceptional
$48,836
Median Male Earnings
Excellent
$56,243
Exceptional
$56,872
Median Female Earnings
Exceptional
$43,243
Exceptional
$41,461
Householder Age | Under 25 years
Exceptional
$53,818
Exceptional
$58,162
Householder Age | 25 - 44 years
Good
$96,824
Exceptional
$104,264
Householder Age | 45 - 64 years
Excellent
$103,736
Exceptional
$116,156
Householder Age | Over 65 years
Exceptional
$64,989
Exceptional
$77,465
Wage/Income Gap
Exceptional
21.8%
Average
25.9%

Ethiopian vs Chinese Poverty

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Ethiopian and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in married-couple family poverty (5.1% compared to 3.6%, a difference of 40.0%), child poverty among boys under 16 (16.5% compared to 11.9%, a difference of 38.8%), and child poverty under the age of 16 (16.3% compared to 11.9%, a difference of 36.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of single male poverty (11.2% compared to 11.0%, a difference of 1.7%), receiving food stamps (10.6% compared to 9.8%, a difference of 8.7%), and single mother poverty (27.7% compared to 24.6%, a difference of 12.6%).
Ethiopian vs Chinese Poverty
Poverty MetricEthiopianChinese
Poverty
Average
12.2%
Exceptional
9.5%
Families
Good
8.8%
Exceptional
6.5%
Males
Average
11.1%
Exceptional
8.7%
Females
Good
13.3%
Exceptional
10.4%
Females 18 to 24 years
Average
20.2%
Exceptional
16.2%
Females 25 to 34 years
Exceptional
12.4%
Exceptional
11.0%
Children Under 5 years
Excellent
16.5%
Exceptional
13.1%
Children Under 16 years
Average
16.3%
Exceptional
11.9%
Boys Under 16 years
Average
16.5%
Exceptional
11.9%
Girls Under 16 years
Average
16.5%
Exceptional
12.3%
Single Males
Exceptional
11.2%
Exceptional
11.0%
Single Females
Exceptional
19.9%
Exceptional
16.1%
Single Fathers
Exceptional
13.5%
Exceptional
15.4%
Single Mothers
Exceptional
27.7%
Exceptional
24.6%
Married Couples
Good
5.1%
Exceptional
3.6%
Seniors Over 65 years
Good
10.7%
Exceptional
8.3%
Seniors Over 75 years
Excellent
11.8%
Exceptional
9.1%
Receiving Food Stamps
Exceptional
10.6%
Exceptional
9.8%

Ethiopian vs Chinese Unemployment

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Ethiopian 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 45.8%), unemployment among ages 60 to 64 years (4.7% compared to 4.0%, a difference of 17.6%), and unemployment among seniors over 65 years (4.9% compared to 4.2%, a difference of 15.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among women with children under 6 years (6.8% compared to 6.8%, a difference of 0.19%), unemployment among ages 25 to 29 years (6.1% compared to 6.1%, a difference of 0.61%), and unemployment among ages 55 to 59 years (4.5% compared to 4.4%, a difference of 1.7%).
Ethiopian vs Chinese Unemployment
Unemployment MetricEthiopianChinese
Unemployment
Excellent
5.1%
Exceptional
4.7%
Males
Exceptional
5.1%
Exceptional
4.9%
Females
Excellent
5.1%
Exceptional
4.5%
Youth < 25
Excellent
11.4%
Exceptional
10.7%
Age | 16 to 19 years
Fair
17.8%
Exceptional
16.0%
Age | 20 to 24 years
Exceptional
9.8%
Exceptional
9.4%
Age | 25 to 29 years
Exceptional
6.1%
Exceptional
6.1%
Age | 30 to 34 years
Exceptional
4.9%
Exceptional
5.1%
Age | 35 to 44 years
Excellent
4.5%
Exceptional
4.3%
Age | 45 to 54 years
Exceptional
4.3%
Exceptional
4.0%
Age | 55 to 59 years
Exceptional
4.5%
Exceptional
4.4%
Age | 60 to 64 years
Exceptional
4.7%
Exceptional
4.0%
Age | 65 to 74 years
Exceptional
5.0%
Exceptional
4.4%
Seniors > 65
Exceptional
4.9%
Exceptional
4.2%
Seniors > 75
Good
8.6%
Exceptional
5.9%
Women w/ Children < 6
Exceptional
6.8%
Exceptional
6.8%
Women w/ Children 6 to 17
Fair
9.0%
Tragic
9.3%
Women w/ Children < 18
Excellent
5.3%
Exceptional
4.9%

Ethiopian vs Chinese Labor Participation

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Ethiopian and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age > 16 (69.3% compared to 64.7%, a difference of 7.2%), in labor force | age 25-29 (86.2% compared to 84.3%, a difference of 2.2%), and in labor force | age 30-34 (86.6% compared to 85.0%, a difference of 1.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 20-24 (77.3% compared to 77.3%, a difference of 0.060%), in labor force | age 45-54 (84.8% compared to 84.1%, a difference of 0.73%), and in labor force | age 16-19 (38.2% compared to 38.6%, a difference of 0.95%).
Ethiopian vs Chinese Labor Participation
Labor Participation MetricEthiopianChinese
In Labor Force | Age > 16
Exceptional
69.3%
Tragic
64.7%
In Labor Force | Age 20-64
Exceptional
82.0%
Exceptional
80.7%
In Labor Force | Age 16-19
Exceptional
38.2%
Exceptional
38.6%
In Labor Force | Age 20-24
Exceptional
77.3%
Exceptional
77.3%
In Labor Force | Age 25-29
Exceptional
86.2%
Poor
84.3%
In Labor Force | Age 30-34
Exceptional
86.6%
Excellent
85.0%
In Labor Force | Age 35-44
Exceptional
85.9%
Exceptional
85.1%
In Labor Force | Age 45-54
Exceptional
84.8%
Exceptional
84.1%

Ethiopian vs Chinese Family Structure

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Ethiopian and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in single mother households (6.5% compared to 5.2%, a difference of 25.7%), single father households (2.4% compared to 2.0%, a difference of 22.1%), and married-couple households (43.2% compared to 50.4%, a difference of 16.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of births to unmarried women (29.8% compared to 30.2%, a difference of 1.3%), average family size (3.24 compared to 3.34, a difference of 3.2%), and family households with children (27.6% compared to 26.0%, a difference of 6.2%).
Ethiopian vs Chinese Family Structure
Family Structure MetricEthiopianChinese
Family Households
Tragic
61.2%
Exceptional
68.1%
Family Households with Children
Good
27.6%
Tragic
26.0%
Married-couple Households
Tragic
43.2%
Exceptional
50.4%
Average Family Size
Good
3.24
Exceptional
3.34
Single Father Households
Poor
2.4%
Exceptional
2.0%
Single Mother Households
Fair
6.5%
Exceptional
5.2%
Currently Married
Tragic
44.5%
Exceptional
49.5%
Divorced or Separated
Average
12.0%
Exceptional
11.2%
Births to Unmarried Women
Exceptional
29.8%
Excellent
30.2%

Ethiopian vs Chinese Vehicle Availability

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Ethiopian and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in 4 or more vehicles in household (5.8% compared to 8.8%, a difference of 53.1%), 3 or more vehicles in household (17.9% compared to 23.9%, a difference of 33.4%), and no vehicles in household (10.5% compared to 8.2%, a difference of 27.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (89.6% compared to 91.9%, a difference of 2.5%), 2 or more vehicles in household (53.1% compared to 60.1%, a difference of 13.1%), and no vehicles in household (10.5% compared to 8.2%, a difference of 27.3%).
Ethiopian vs Chinese Vehicle Availability
Vehicle Availability MetricEthiopianChinese
No Vehicles Available
Average
10.5%
Exceptional
8.2%
1+ Vehicles Available
Average
89.6%
Exceptional
91.9%
2+ Vehicles Available
Tragic
53.1%
Exceptional
60.1%
3+ Vehicles Available
Tragic
17.9%
Exceptional
23.9%
4+ Vehicles Available
Tragic
5.8%
Exceptional
8.8%

Ethiopian vs Chinese Education Level

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Ethiopian and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in no schooling completed (2.4% compared to 1.5%, a difference of 64.7%), doctorate degree (2.3% compared to 1.8%, a difference of 33.2%), and master's degree (18.0% compared to 14.6%, a difference of 23.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of college, under 1 year (68.3% compared to 68.3%, a difference of 0.030%), nursery school (97.6% compared to 98.6%, a difference of 0.96%), and kindergarten (97.6% compared to 98.5%, a difference of 0.97%).
Ethiopian vs Chinese Education Level
Education Level MetricEthiopianChinese
No Schooling Completed
Tragic
2.4%
Exceptional
1.5%
Nursery School
Tragic
97.6%
Exceptional
98.6%
Kindergarten
Tragic
97.6%
Exceptional
98.5%
1st Grade
Tragic
97.6%
Exceptional
98.5%
2nd Grade
Tragic
97.5%
Exceptional
98.5%
3rd Grade
Tragic
97.4%
Exceptional
98.4%
4th Grade
Tragic
97.1%
Exceptional
98.3%
5th Grade
Tragic
96.9%
Exceptional
98.1%
6th Grade
Tragic
96.6%
Exceptional
97.9%
7th Grade
Tragic
95.4%
Exceptional
97.1%
8th Grade
Tragic
95.1%
Exceptional
96.9%
9th Grade
Tragic
94.4%
Exceptional
96.3%
10th Grade
Tragic
93.2%
Exceptional
95.5%
11th Grade
Poor
92.2%
Exceptional
94.6%
12th Grade, No Diploma
Fair
91.0%
Exceptional
93.6%
High School Diploma
Fair
89.0%
Exceptional
92.0%
GED/Equivalency
Good
86.0%
Exceptional
89.0%
College, Under 1 year
Exceptional
68.3%
Exceptional
68.3%
College, 1 year or more
Exceptional
62.9%
Exceptional
62.2%
Associate's Degree
Exceptional
50.4%
Exceptional
48.5%
Bachelor's Degree
Exceptional
42.8%
Good
38.5%
Master's Degree
Exceptional
18.0%
Fair
14.6%
Professional Degree
Exceptional
5.4%
Average
4.5%
Doctorate Degree
Exceptional
2.3%
Fair
1.8%

Ethiopian vs Chinese Disability

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Ethiopian and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in hearing disability (2.7% compared to 3.7%, a difference of 37.7%), ambulatory disability (5.4% compared to 6.5%, a difference of 21.0%), and male disability (10.2% compared to 12.1%, a difference of 18.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of disability age under 5 (1.1% compared to 1.1%, a difference of 0.030%), disability age 18 to 34 (6.2% compared to 6.3%, a difference of 1.3%), and disability age 35 to 64 (10.5% compared to 10.3%, a difference of 1.5%).
Ethiopian vs Chinese Disability
Disability MetricEthiopianChinese
Disability
Exceptional
10.7%
Tragic
12.2%
Males
Exceptional
10.2%
Tragic
12.1%
Females
Exceptional
11.2%
Fair
12.3%
Age | Under 5 years
Exceptional
1.1%
Exceptional
1.1%
Age | 5 to 17 years
Exceptional
5.3%
Exceptional
4.7%
Age | 18 to 34 years
Exceptional
6.2%
Exceptional
6.3%
Age | 35 to 64 years
Exceptional
10.5%
Exceptional
10.3%
Age | 65 to 74 years
Excellent
22.7%
Exceptional
21.7%
Age | Over 75 years
Excellent
46.8%
Tragic
48.7%
Vision
Exceptional
2.0%
Exceptional
2.0%
Hearing
Exceptional
2.7%
Tragic
3.7%
Cognitive
Tragic
17.9%
Exceptional
15.9%
Ambulatory
Exceptional
5.4%
Tragic
6.5%
Self-Care
Exceptional
2.2%
Tragic
2.6%