Immigrants from Moldova vs Immigrants from Congo Community Comparison

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 53,041,823 people shows a poor negative correlation between the proportion of Immigrants from Congo within Immigrant from Moldova communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of -0.141. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Immigrants from Moldova within a typical geography, there is a decrease of 0.018% in Immigrants from Congo. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Immigrants from Moldova corresponds to a decrease of 18.1 Immigrants from Congo.

When considering income, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Moldova and Immigrants from Congo communities in the United States are seen in householder income ages 25 - 44 years ($101,091 compared to $72,178, a difference of 40.1%), householder income ages 45 - 64 years ($107,357 compared to $77,850, a difference of 37.9%), and median household income ($91,446 compared to $66,768, a difference of 37.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of wage/income gap (26.2% compared to 21.7%, a difference of 20.8%), householder income over 65 years ($62,939 compared to $51,393, a difference of 22.5%), and median female earnings ($42,304 compared to $34,317, a difference of 23.3%).

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Moldova and Immigrants from Congo communities in the United States are seen in child poverty under the age of 5 (14.5% compared to 23.9%, a difference of 64.7%), child poverty among girls under 16 (13.9% compared to 22.7%, a difference of 63.6%), and child poverty under the age of 16 (13.8% compared to 22.5%, a difference of 63.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of single father poverty (15.2% compared to 15.4%, a difference of 1.2%), seniors poverty over the age of 75 (11.9% compared to 12.5%, a difference of 4.6%), and seniors poverty over the age of 65 (10.4% compared to 11.7%, a difference of 12.9%).

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Moldova and Immigrants from Congo communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among women with children under 6 years (6.6% compared to 8.5%, a difference of 28.2%), unemployment among seniors over 75 years (8.3% compared to 6.7%, a difference of 24.0%), and unemployment among women with children under 18 years (5.0% compared to 6.0%, a difference of 19.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among ages 25 to 29 years (6.5% compared to 6.4%, a difference of 0.87%), unemployment among ages 30 to 34 years (5.1% compared to 5.1%, a difference of 1.6%), and unemployment among youth under 25 years (11.2% compared to 10.9%, a difference of 2.9%).

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Moldova and Immigrants from Congo communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (37.7% compared to 41.7%, a difference of 10.6%), in labor force | age 45-54 (83.7% compared to 81.6%, a difference of 2.6%), and in labor force | age 35-44 (85.0% compared to 83.5%, a difference of 1.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 30-34 (85.3% compared to 84.6%, a difference of 0.83%), in labor force | age 20-24 (76.6% compared to 77.4%, a difference of 1.0%), and in labor force | age 25-29 (85.1% compared to 84.2%, a difference of 1.1%).

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Moldova and Immigrants from Congo communities in the United States are seen in single mother households (5.6% compared to 8.1%, a difference of 43.7%), births to unmarried women (27.3% compared to 36.8%, a difference of 34.8%), and married-couple households (48.0% compared to 39.0%, a difference of 22.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of family households with children (27.6% compared to 27.3%, a difference of 1.2%), average family size (3.18 compared to 3.23, a difference of 1.7%), and family households (64.4% compared to 59.2%, a difference of 8.8%).

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Moldova and Immigrants from Congo communities in the United States are seen in 4 or more vehicles in household (6.0% compared to 5.2%, a difference of 13.6%), 3 or more vehicles in household (19.1% compared to 17.0%, a difference of 12.3%), and 2 or more vehicles in household (56.1% compared to 52.1%, a difference of 7.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (90.2% compared to 90.0%, a difference of 0.27%), no vehicles in household (9.8% compared to 10.1%, a difference of 2.5%), and 2 or more vehicles in household (56.1% compared to 52.1%, a difference of 7.7%).

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Moldova and Immigrants from Congo communities in the United States are seen in professional degree (4.9% compared to 3.6%, a difference of 33.7%), master's degree (16.6% compared to 12.6%, a difference of 31.5%), and bachelor's degree (41.6% compared to 33.6%, a difference of 23.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of nursery school (98.0% compared to 97.6%, a difference of 0.44%), kindergarten (98.0% compared to 97.6%, a difference of 0.44%), and 1st grade (98.0% compared to 97.5%, a difference of 0.45%).

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Moldova and Immigrants from Congo communities in the United States are seen in disability age 35 to 64 (10.6% compared to 13.3%, a difference of 25.9%), disability age 5 to 17 (5.2% compared to 6.2%, a difference of 18.7%), and cognitive disability (16.7% compared to 19.7%, a difference of 18.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of disability age over 75 (47.4% compared to 48.7%, a difference of 2.7%), hearing disability (3.0% compared to 2.9%, a difference of 3.9%), and ambulatory disability (6.0% compared to 6.2%, a difference of 4.1%).