Lithuanian vs Creek Community Comparison

COMPARE

Lithuanian
Race
Ancestry
AfghanAfricanAlaska NativeAlaskan AthabascanAlbanianAleutAlsatianAmericanApacheArabArapahoArgentineanArmenianAssyrian/Chaldean/SyriacAustralianAustrianBahamianBangladeshiBarbadianBasqueBelgianBelizeanBermudanBhutaneseBlackfeetBolivianBrazilianBritishBritish West IndianBulgarianBurmeseCajunCambodianCanadianCape VerdeanCarpatho RusynCelticCentral AmericanCentral American IndianCherokeeCheyenneChickasawChileanChineseChippewaChoctawColombianColvilleComancheCosta RicanCreeCroatianCrowCubanCypriotCzechCzechoslovakianDanishDelawareDominicanDutchDutch West IndianEastern EuropeanEcuadorianEgyptianEnglishEstonianEthiopianEuropeanFijianFilipinoFinnishFrenchFrench 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
Creek
Race
Ancestry
AfghanAfricanAlaska NativeAlaskan AthabascanAlbanianAleutAlsatianAmericanApacheArabArapahoArgentineanArmenianAssyrian/Chaldean/SyriacAustralianAustrianBahamianBangladeshiBarbadianBasqueBelgianBelizeanBermudanBhutaneseBlackfeetBolivianBrazilianBritishBritish West IndianBulgarianBurmeseCajunCambodianCanadianCape VerdeanCarpatho RusynCelticCentral AmericanCentral American IndianCherokeeCheyenneChickasawChileanChineseChippewaChoctawColombianColvilleComancheCosta RicanCreeCreekCroatianCrowCubanCypriotCzechCzechoslovakianDanishDelawareDominicanDutchDutch West IndianEastern EuropeanEcuadorianEgyptianEnglishEstonianEthiopianEuropeanFijianFilipinoFinnishFrenchFrench American IndianFrench CanadianGermanGerman RussianGhanaianGreekGuamanian/ChamorroGuatemalanGuyaneseHaitianHmongHonduranHopiHoumaHungarianIcelanderIndian (Asian)IndonesianInupiatIranianIraqiIrishIroquoisIsraeliItalianJamaicanJapaneseJordanianKenyanKiowaKoreanLaotianLatvianLebaneseLiberianLumbeeLuxembourgerMacedonianMalaysianMalteseMarshalleseMenomineeMexicanMexican 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

Lithuanians

Creek

Excellent
Fair
8,827
SOCIAL INDEX
85.7/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
46th/ 347
SOCIAL RANK
2,959
SOCIAL INDEX
27.1/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
237th/ 347
SOCIAL RANK

Creek Integration in Lithuanian Communities

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 154,358,001 people shows a near-perfect positive correlation between the proportion of Creek within Lithuanian communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.933. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Lithuanians within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.461% in Creek. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Lithuanians corresponds to an increase of 461.2 Creek.
Lithuanian Integration in Creek Communities

Lithuanian vs Creek Income

When considering income, the most significant differences between Lithuanian and Creek communities in the United States are seen in householder income ages 45 - 64 years ($112,484 compared to $78,960, a difference of 42.5%), householder income ages 25 - 44 years ($105,223 compared to $74,847, a difference of 40.6%), and median family income ($115,395 compared to $82,560, a difference of 39.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of wage/income gap (28.7% compared to 27.1%, a difference of 5.9%), householder income under 25 years ($53,552 compared to $45,371, a difference of 18.0%), and householder income over 65 years ($65,209 compared to $51,949, a difference of 25.5%).
Lithuanian vs Creek Income
Income MetricLithuanianCreek
Per Capita Income
Exceptional
$49,448
Tragic
$35,546
Median Family Income
Exceptional
$115,395
Tragic
$82,560
Median Household Income
Exceptional
$93,852
Tragic
$67,715
Median Earnings
Exceptional
$50,991
Tragic
$39,648
Median Male Earnings
Exceptional
$61,228
Tragic
$46,594
Median Female Earnings
Exceptional
$42,108
Tragic
$33,437
Householder Age | Under 25 years
Exceptional
$53,552
Tragic
$45,371
Householder Age | 25 - 44 years
Exceptional
$105,223
Tragic
$74,847
Householder Age | 45 - 64 years
Exceptional
$112,484
Tragic
$78,960
Householder Age | Over 65 years
Exceptional
$65,209
Tragic
$51,949
Wage/Income Gap
Tragic
28.7%
Tragic
27.1%

Lithuanian vs Creek Poverty

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Lithuanian and Creek communities in the United States are seen in family poverty (7.2% compared to 11.7%, a difference of 62.2%), child poverty under the age of 5 (15.2% compared to 24.2%, a difference of 59.5%), and child poverty under the age of 16 (13.5% compared to 21.5%, a difference of 59.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of seniors poverty over the age of 75 (10.6% compared to 11.6%, a difference of 9.2%), single father poverty (17.3% compared to 19.8%, a difference of 14.8%), and seniors poverty over the age of 65 (9.1% compared to 10.9%, a difference of 20.6%).
Lithuanian vs Creek Poverty
Poverty MetricLithuanianCreek
Poverty
Exceptional
10.5%
Tragic
15.6%
Families
Exceptional
7.2%
Tragic
11.7%
Males
Exceptional
9.5%
Tragic
14.1%
Females
Exceptional
11.4%
Tragic
17.0%
Females 18 to 24 years
Exceptional
18.7%
Tragic
24.2%
Females 25 to 34 years
Exceptional
12.2%
Tragic
19.2%
Children Under 5 years
Exceptional
15.2%
Tragic
24.2%
Children Under 16 years
Exceptional
13.5%
Tragic
21.5%
Boys Under 16 years
Exceptional
14.0%
Tragic
21.5%
Girls Under 16 years
Exceptional
13.9%
Tragic
21.7%
Single Males
Fair
13.0%
Tragic
16.8%
Single Females
Exceptional
19.2%
Tragic
27.4%
Single Fathers
Tragic
17.3%
Tragic
19.8%
Single Mothers
Exceptional
27.4%
Tragic
36.7%
Married Couples
Exceptional
4.0%
Tragic
6.2%
Seniors Over 65 years
Exceptional
9.1%
Average
10.9%
Seniors Over 75 years
Exceptional
10.6%
Exceptional
11.6%
Receiving Food Stamps
Exceptional
9.7%
Tragic
14.1%

Lithuanian vs Creek Unemployment

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Lithuanian and Creek communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among seniors over 75 years (9.9% compared to 7.8%, a difference of 26.7%), unemployment among ages 30 to 34 years (5.4% compared to 6.6%, a difference of 22.1%), and unemployment among ages 35 to 44 years (4.4% compared to 5.4%, a difference of 21.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among women with children ages 6 to 17 years (9.4% compared to 9.4%, a difference of 0.33%), unemployment among youth under 25 years (11.3% compared to 11.2%, a difference of 0.69%), and unemployment among ages 16 to 19 years (16.7% compared to 17.2%, a difference of 2.7%).
Lithuanian vs Creek Unemployment
Unemployment MetricLithuanianCreek
Unemployment
Exceptional
4.8%
Poor
5.4%
Males
Exceptional
5.0%
Tragic
5.6%
Females
Exceptional
4.7%
Poor
5.4%
Youth < 25
Exceptional
11.3%
Exceptional
11.2%
Age | 16 to 19 years
Exceptional
16.7%
Excellent
17.2%
Age | 20 to 24 years
Good
10.2%
Exceptional
9.7%
Age | 25 to 29 years
Good
6.5%
Tragic
7.6%
Age | 30 to 34 years
Good
5.4%
Tragic
6.6%
Age | 35 to 44 years
Exceptional
4.4%
Tragic
5.4%
Age | 45 to 54 years
Exceptional
4.3%
Poor
4.6%
Age | 55 to 59 years
Excellent
4.7%
Poor
4.9%
Age | 60 to 64 years
Excellent
4.8%
Exceptional
4.6%
Age | 65 to 74 years
Fair
5.4%
Exceptional
4.8%
Seniors > 65
Average
5.1%
Exceptional
4.6%
Seniors > 75
Tragic
9.9%
Exceptional
7.8%
Women w/ Children < 6
Fair
7.8%
Tragic
8.9%
Women w/ Children 6 to 17
Tragic
9.4%
Tragic
9.4%
Women w/ Children < 18
Exceptional
5.0%
Tragic
5.8%

Lithuanian vs Creek Labor Participation

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Lithuanian and Creek communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 45-54 (83.6% compared to 77.7%, a difference of 7.6%), in labor force | age 20-64 (80.2% compared to 75.1%, a difference of 6.8%), and in labor force | age 30-34 (85.6% compared to 80.4%, a difference of 6.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 20-24 (77.0% compared to 74.5%, a difference of 3.3%), in labor force | age 16-19 (40.4% compared to 39.1%, a difference of 3.3%), and in labor force | age > 16 (64.8% compared to 61.3%, a difference of 5.7%).
Lithuanian vs Creek Labor Participation
Labor Participation MetricLithuanianCreek
In Labor Force | Age > 16
Poor
64.8%
Tragic
61.3%
In Labor Force | Age 20-64
Exceptional
80.2%
Tragic
75.1%
In Labor Force | Age 16-19
Exceptional
40.4%
Exceptional
39.1%
In Labor Force | Age 20-24
Exceptional
77.0%
Poor
74.5%
In Labor Force | Age 25-29
Exceptional
85.8%
Tragic
80.7%
In Labor Force | Age 30-34
Exceptional
85.6%
Tragic
80.4%
In Labor Force | Age 35-44
Exceptional
85.2%
Tragic
80.0%
In Labor Force | Age 45-54
Exceptional
83.6%
Tragic
77.7%

Lithuanian vs Creek Family Structure

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Lithuanian and Creek communities in the United States are seen in single mother households (5.4% compared to 7.0%, a difference of 29.3%), births to unmarried women (29.6% compared to 37.6%, a difference of 27.1%), and single father households (2.1% compared to 2.6%, a difference of 23.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of family households (64.0% compared to 64.2%, a difference of 0.17%), family households with children (26.6% compared to 27.4%, a difference of 3.0%), and average family size (3.10 compared to 3.20, a difference of 3.1%).
Lithuanian vs Creek Family Structure
Family Structure MetricLithuanianCreek
Family Households
Fair
64.0%
Fair
64.2%
Family Households with Children
Tragic
26.6%
Fair
27.4%
Married-couple Households
Exceptional
48.9%
Tragic
45.3%
Average Family Size
Tragic
3.10
Poor
3.20
Single Father Households
Exceptional
2.1%
Tragic
2.6%
Single Mother Households
Exceptional
5.4%
Tragic
7.0%
Currently Married
Exceptional
49.0%
Poor
46.0%
Divorced or Separated
Exceptional
11.7%
Tragic
14.4%
Births to Unmarried Women
Exceptional
29.6%
Tragic
37.6%

Lithuanian vs Creek Vehicle Availability

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Lithuanian and Creek communities in the United States are seen in 4 or more vehicles in household (6.3% compared to 7.2%, a difference of 13.7%), 3 or more vehicles in household (20.1% compared to 21.9%, a difference of 8.9%), and no vehicles in household (8.4% compared to 7.8%, a difference of 8.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 2 or more vehicles in household (58.2% compared to 58.3%, a difference of 0.060%), 1 or more vehicles in household (91.7% compared to 92.3%, a difference of 0.65%), and no vehicles in household (8.4% compared to 7.8%, a difference of 8.4%).
Lithuanian vs Creek Vehicle Availability
Vehicle Availability MetricLithuanianCreek
No Vehicles Available
Exceptional
8.4%
Exceptional
7.8%
1+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
91.7%
Exceptional
92.3%
2+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
58.2%
Exceptional
58.3%
3+ Vehicles Available
Excellent
20.1%
Exceptional
21.9%
4+ Vehicles Available
Average
6.3%
Exceptional
7.2%

Lithuanian vs Creek Education Level

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Lithuanian and Creek communities in the United States are seen in professional degree (5.4% compared to 3.1%, a difference of 73.8%), master's degree (17.7% compared to 10.5%, a difference of 68.8%), and doctorate degree (2.3% compared to 1.3%, a difference of 67.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of nursery school (98.6% compared to 98.4%, a difference of 0.21%), kindergarten (98.6% compared to 98.4%, a difference of 0.21%), and 1st grade (98.6% compared to 98.4%, a difference of 0.21%).
Lithuanian vs Creek Education Level
Education Level MetricLithuanianCreek
No Schooling Completed
Exceptional
1.4%
Exceptional
1.6%
Nursery School
Exceptional
98.6%
Exceptional
98.4%
Kindergarten
Exceptional
98.6%
Exceptional
98.4%
1st Grade
Exceptional
98.6%
Exceptional
98.4%
2nd Grade
Exceptional
98.5%
Exceptional
98.3%
3rd Grade
Exceptional
98.5%
Exceptional
98.2%
4th Grade
Exceptional
98.3%
Exceptional
98.1%
5th Grade
Exceptional
98.2%
Exceptional
98.0%
6th Grade
Exceptional
98.1%
Exceptional
97.7%
7th Grade
Exceptional
97.5%
Exceptional
96.9%
8th Grade
Exceptional
97.3%
Exceptional
96.6%
9th Grade
Exceptional
96.6%
Exceptional
95.6%
10th Grade
Exceptional
95.8%
Exceptional
94.2%
11th Grade
Exceptional
94.8%
Average
92.4%
12th Grade, No Diploma
Exceptional
93.6%
Tragic
90.3%
High School Diploma
Exceptional
92.0%
Tragic
88.3%
GED/Equivalency
Exceptional
88.9%
Tragic
83.6%
College, Under 1 year
Exceptional
68.8%
Tragic
59.3%
College, 1 year or more
Exceptional
62.9%
Tragic
52.2%
Associate's Degree
Exceptional
50.6%
Tragic
37.6%
Bachelor's Degree
Exceptional
42.2%
Tragic
28.9%
Master's Degree
Exceptional
17.7%
Tragic
10.5%
Professional Degree
Exceptional
5.4%
Tragic
3.1%
Doctorate Degree
Exceptional
2.3%
Tragic
1.3%

Lithuanian vs Creek Disability

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Lithuanian and Creek communities in the United States are seen in vision disability (2.0% compared to 3.2%, a difference of 57.2%), disability age 35 to 64 (10.8% compared to 16.9%, a difference of 56.3%), and disability age 65 to 74 (21.4% compared to 30.2%, a difference of 41.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of disability age under 5 (1.6% compared to 1.6%, a difference of 5.4%), cognitive disability (16.3% compared to 18.3%, a difference of 12.4%), and disability age over 75 (45.1% compared to 51.5%, a difference of 14.2%).
Lithuanian vs Creek Disability
Disability MetricLithuanianCreek
Disability
Poor
11.9%
Tragic
15.6%
Males
Tragic
11.6%
Tragic
15.5%
Females
Average
12.2%
Tragic
15.7%
Age | Under 5 years
Tragic
1.6%
Tragic
1.6%
Age | 5 to 17 years
Tragic
5.8%
Tragic
6.9%
Age | 18 to 34 years
Tragic
7.0%
Tragic
9.0%
Age | 35 to 64 years
Excellent
10.8%
Tragic
16.9%
Age | 65 to 74 years
Exceptional
21.4%
Tragic
30.2%
Age | Over 75 years
Exceptional
45.1%
Tragic
51.5%
Vision
Exceptional
2.0%
Tragic
3.2%
Hearing
Tragic
3.4%
Tragic
4.4%
Cognitive
Exceptional
16.3%
Tragic
18.3%
Ambulatory
Excellent
6.0%
Tragic
8.5%
Self-Care
Exceptional
2.4%
Tragic
2.8%