Luxembourger vs Slavic Community Comparison

COMPARE

Luxembourger
Race
Ancestry
AfghanAfricanAlaska NativeAlaskan AthabascanAlbanianAleutAlsatianAmericanApacheArabArapahoArgentineanArmenianAssyrian/Chaldean/SyriacAustralianAustrianBahamianBangladeshiBarbadianBasqueBelgianBelizeanBermudanBhutaneseBlackfeetBolivianBrazilianBritishBritish West IndianBulgarianBurmeseCajunCambodianCanadianCape VerdeanCarpatho RusynCelticCentral AmericanCentral American IndianCherokeeCheyenneChickasawChileanChineseChippewaChoctawColombianColvilleComancheCosta RicanCreeCreekCroatianCrowCubanCypriotCzechCzechoslovakianDanishDelawareDominicanDutchDutch West IndianEastern EuropeanEcuadorianEgyptianEnglishEstonianEthiopianEuropeanFijianFilipinoFinnishFrenchFrench American IndianFrench CanadianGermanGerman RussianGhanaianGreekGuamanian/ChamorroGuatemalanGuyaneseHaitianHmongHonduranHopiHoumaHungarianIcelanderIndian (Asian)IndonesianInupiatIranianIraqiIrishIroquoisIsraeliItalianJamaicanJapaneseJordanianKenyanKiowaKoreanLaotianLatvianLebaneseLiberianLithuanianLumbeeLuxembourgerMacedonianMalaysianMalteseMarshalleseMenomineeMexicanMexican American IndianMongolianMoroccanNative HawaiianNavajoNepaleseNew ZealanderNicaraguanNigerianNorthern EuropeanNorwegianOkinawanOsageOttawaPaiutePakistaniPalestinianPanamanianParaguayanPennsylvania GermanPeruvianPimaPolishPortuguesePotawatomiPuebloPuerto RicanPuget Sound SalishRomanianRussianSalvadoranSamoanScandinavianScotch-IrishScottishSeminoleSenegaleseSerbianShoshoneSierra LeoneanSiouxSlovakSloveneSomaliSouth 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
Slavic
Race
Ancestry
AfghanAfricanAlaska NativeAlaskan AthabascanAlbanianAleutAlsatianAmericanApacheArabArapahoArgentineanArmenianAssyrian/Chaldean/SyriacAustralianAustrianBahamianBangladeshiBarbadianBasqueBelgianBelizeanBermudanBhutaneseBlackfeetBolivianBrazilianBritishBritish West IndianBulgarianBurmeseCajunCambodianCanadianCape VerdeanCarpatho RusynCelticCentral AmericanCentral American IndianCherokeeCheyenneChickasawChileanChineseChippewaChoctawColombianColvilleComancheCosta RicanCreeCreekCroatianCrowCubanCypriotCzechCzechoslovakianDanishDelawareDominicanDutchDutch West IndianEastern EuropeanEcuadorianEgyptianEnglishEstonianEthiopianEuropeanFijianFilipinoFinnishFrenchFrench American IndianFrench CanadianGermanGerman RussianGhanaianGreekGuamanian/ChamorroGuatemalanGuyaneseHaitianHmongHonduranHopiHoumaHungarianIcelanderIndian (Asian)IndonesianInupiatIranianIraqiIrishIroquoisIsraeliItalianJamaicanJapaneseJordanianKenyanKiowaKoreanLaotianLatvianLebaneseLiberianLithuanianLumbeeMacedonianMalaysianMalteseMenomineeMexicanMexican 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

Luxembourgers

Slavs

Excellent
Good
9,215
SOCIAL INDEX
89.6/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
27th/ 347
SOCIAL RANK
7,593
SOCIAL INDEX
73.4/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
111th/ 347
SOCIAL RANK

Slavic Integration in Luxembourger Communities

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 113,550,894 people shows a mild positive correlation between the proportion of Slavs within Luxembourger communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.321. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Luxembourgers within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.055% in Slavs. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Luxembourgers corresponds to an increase of 55.3 Slavs.
Luxembourger Integration in Slavic Communities

Luxembourger vs Slavic Income

When considering income, the most significant differences between Luxembourger and Slavic communities in the United States are seen in per capita income ($45,663 compared to $45,049, a difference of 1.4%), householder income over 65 years ($60,967 compared to $61,709, a difference of 1.2%), and median family income ($106,183 compared to $105,144, a difference of 0.99%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of median household income ($86,418 compared to $86,398, a difference of 0.020%), wage/income gap (27.4% compared to 27.4%, a difference of 0.040%), and median male earnings ($56,300 compared to $56,390, a difference of 0.16%).
Luxembourger vs Slavic Income
Income MetricLuxembourgerSlavic
Per Capita Income
Exceptional
$45,663
Excellent
$45,049
Median Family Income
Excellent
$106,183
Good
$105,144
Median Household Income
Good
$86,418
Good
$86,398
Median Earnings
Excellent
$47,640
Excellent
$47,470
Median Male Earnings
Excellent
$56,300
Excellent
$56,390
Median Female Earnings
Average
$39,891
Average
$39,613
Householder Age | Under 25 years
Tragic
$50,379
Tragic
$50,563
Householder Age | 25 - 44 years
Excellent
$97,237
Good
$96,377
Householder Age | 45 - 64 years
Excellent
$103,536
Good
$102,629
Householder Age | Over 65 years
Average
$60,967
Good
$61,709
Wage/Income Gap
Tragic
27.4%
Tragic
27.4%

Luxembourger vs Slavic Poverty

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Luxembourger and Slavic communities in the United States are seen in receiving food stamps (9.1% compared to 10.6%, a difference of 16.3%), married-couple family poverty (3.9% compared to 4.4%, a difference of 14.6%), and child poverty under the age of 5 (14.9% compared to 17.0%, a difference of 13.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of single male poverty (13.4% compared to 13.3%, a difference of 0.53%), single father poverty (17.1% compared to 17.4%, a difference of 1.5%), and single female poverty (20.4% compared to 21.1%, a difference of 3.4%).
Luxembourger vs Slavic Poverty
Poverty MetricLuxembourgerSlavic
Poverty
Exceptional
10.6%
Exceptional
11.5%
Families
Exceptional
7.2%
Exceptional
8.1%
Males
Exceptional
9.5%
Exceptional
10.5%
Females
Exceptional
11.6%
Exceptional
12.5%
Females 18 to 24 years
Tragic
20.9%
Excellent
19.7%
Females 25 to 34 years
Exceptional
12.1%
Good
13.2%
Children Under 5 years
Exceptional
14.9%
Good
17.0%
Children Under 16 years
Exceptional
13.6%
Excellent
15.4%
Boys Under 16 years
Exceptional
13.8%
Excellent
15.7%
Girls Under 16 years
Exceptional
14.3%
Excellent
15.7%
Single Males
Tragic
13.4%
Tragic
13.3%
Single Females
Excellent
20.4%
Average
21.1%
Single Fathers
Tragic
17.1%
Tragic
17.4%
Single Mothers
Excellent
28.5%
Fair
29.6%
Married Couples
Exceptional
3.9%
Exceptional
4.4%
Seniors Over 65 years
Exceptional
9.2%
Exceptional
9.8%
Seniors Over 75 years
Exceptional
10.8%
Exceptional
11.2%
Receiving Food Stamps
Exceptional
9.1%
Exceptional
10.6%

Luxembourger vs Slavic Unemployment

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Luxembourger and Slavic communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among seniors over 75 years (7.7% compared to 9.2%, a difference of 19.1%), unemployment among women with children under 6 years (6.6% compared to 7.7%, a difference of 16.7%), and unemployment among ages 30 to 34 years (4.8% compared to 5.5%, a difference of 15.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among ages 65 to 74 years (5.2% compared to 5.2%, a difference of 0.51%), unemployment among ages 45 to 54 years (4.2% compared to 4.3%, a difference of 2.1%), and unemployment among seniors over 65 years (4.8% compared to 5.0%, a difference of 2.4%).
Luxembourger vs Slavic Unemployment
Unemployment MetricLuxembourgerSlavic
Unemployment
Exceptional
4.3%
Exceptional
4.9%
Males
Exceptional
4.5%
Exceptional
5.1%
Females
Exceptional
4.4%
Exceptional
4.9%
Youth < 25
Exceptional
10.0%
Exceptional
11.2%
Age | 16 to 19 years
Exceptional
15.1%
Exceptional
16.7%
Age | 20 to 24 years
Exceptional
9.1%
Exceptional
10.0%
Age | 25 to 29 years
Exceptional
6.2%
Good
6.5%
Age | 30 to 34 years
Exceptional
4.8%
Fair
5.5%
Age | 35 to 44 years
Exceptional
4.3%
Good
4.6%
Age | 45 to 54 years
Exceptional
4.2%
Exceptional
4.3%
Age | 55 to 59 years
Exceptional
4.5%
Excellent
4.7%
Age | 60 to 64 years
Exceptional
4.3%
Exceptional
4.6%
Age | 65 to 74 years
Exceptional
5.2%
Exceptional
5.2%
Seniors > 65
Exceptional
4.8%
Exceptional
5.0%
Seniors > 75
Exceptional
7.7%
Tragic
9.2%
Women w/ Children < 6
Exceptional
6.6%
Fair
7.7%
Women w/ Children 6 to 17
Exceptional
8.3%
Exceptional
8.7%
Women w/ Children < 18
Exceptional
5.0%
Excellent
5.2%

Luxembourger vs Slavic Labor Participation

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Luxembourger and Slavic communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (45.3% compared to 40.4%, a difference of 12.2%), in labor force | age > 16 (66.7% compared to 64.6%, a difference of 3.3%), and in labor force | age 20-64 (81.9% compared to 79.6%, a difference of 2.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 30-34 (86.6% compared to 85.0%, a difference of 1.9%), in labor force | age 35-44 (86.4% compared to 84.7%, a difference of 2.0%), and in labor force | age 25-29 (86.9% compared to 85.1%, a difference of 2.1%).
Luxembourger vs Slavic Labor Participation
Labor Participation MetricLuxembourgerSlavic
In Labor Force | Age > 16
Exceptional
66.7%
Tragic
64.6%
In Labor Force | Age 20-64
Exceptional
81.9%
Average
79.6%
In Labor Force | Age 16-19
Exceptional
45.3%
Exceptional
40.4%
In Labor Force | Age 20-24
Exceptional
79.0%
Exceptional
76.9%
In Labor Force | Age 25-29
Exceptional
86.9%
Exceptional
85.1%
In Labor Force | Age 30-34
Exceptional
86.6%
Exceptional
85.0%
In Labor Force | Age 35-44
Exceptional
86.4%
Exceptional
84.7%
In Labor Force | Age 45-54
Exceptional
85.0%
Good
82.9%

Luxembourger vs Slavic Family Structure

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Luxembourger and Slavic communities in the United States are seen in divorced or separated (11.3% compared to 12.2%, a difference of 7.7%), births to unmarried women (29.4% compared to 31.6%, a difference of 7.4%), and single mother households (5.6% compared to 5.9%, a difference of 5.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of single father households (2.2% compared to 2.2%, a difference of 0.77%), family households with children (27.0% compared to 26.8%, a difference of 0.83%), and average family size (3.10 compared to 3.13, a difference of 0.84%).
Luxembourger vs Slavic Family Structure
Family Structure MetricLuxembourgerSlavic
Family Households
Tragic
63.3%
Poor
64.0%
Family Households with Children
Tragic
27.0%
Tragic
26.8%
Married-couple Households
Exceptional
48.5%
Exceptional
47.8%
Average Family Size
Tragic
3.10
Tragic
3.13
Single Father Households
Exceptional
2.2%
Excellent
2.2%
Single Mother Households
Exceptional
5.6%
Exceptional
5.9%
Currently Married
Exceptional
49.3%
Exceptional
48.4%
Divorced or Separated
Exceptional
11.3%
Poor
12.2%
Births to Unmarried Women
Exceptional
29.4%
Average
31.6%

Luxembourger vs Slavic Vehicle Availability

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Luxembourger and Slavic communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (5.4% compared to 9.0%, a difference of 67.1%), 1 or more vehicles in household (94.8% compared to 91.2%, a difference of 4.0%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (20.9% compared to 20.4%, a difference of 2.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 4 or more vehicles in household (6.6% compared to 6.6%, a difference of 0.88%), 2 or more vehicles in household (59.1% compared to 57.8%, a difference of 2.2%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (20.9% compared to 20.4%, a difference of 2.3%).
Luxembourger vs Slavic Vehicle Availability
Vehicle Availability MetricLuxembourgerSlavic
No Vehicles Available
Exceptional
5.4%
Exceptional
9.0%
1+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
94.8%
Exceptional
91.2%
2+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
59.1%
Exceptional
57.8%
3+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
20.9%
Exceptional
20.4%
4+ Vehicles Available
Excellent
6.6%
Excellent
6.6%

Luxembourger vs Slavic Education Level

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Luxembourger and Slavic communities in the United States are seen in no schooling completed (1.6% compared to 1.7%, a difference of 3.9%), associate's degree (48.9% compared to 47.6%, a difference of 2.8%), and college, 1 year or more (62.1% compared to 60.6%, a difference of 2.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of nursery school (98.5% compared to 98.4%, a difference of 0.090%), kindergarten (98.5% compared to 98.4%, a difference of 0.090%), and 3rd grade (98.3% compared to 98.3%, a difference of 0.090%).
Luxembourger vs Slavic Education Level
Education Level MetricLuxembourgerSlavic
No Schooling Completed
Exceptional
1.6%
Exceptional
1.7%
Nursery School
Exceptional
98.5%
Exceptional
98.4%
Kindergarten
Exceptional
98.5%
Exceptional
98.4%
1st Grade
Exceptional
98.5%
Exceptional
98.4%
2nd Grade
Exceptional
98.4%
Exceptional
98.3%
3rd Grade
Exceptional
98.3%
Exceptional
98.3%
4th Grade
Exceptional
98.2%
Exceptional
98.1%
5th Grade
Exceptional
98.1%
Exceptional
98.0%
6th Grade
Exceptional
97.9%
Exceptional
97.8%
7th Grade
Exceptional
97.2%
Exceptional
97.1%
8th Grade
Exceptional
97.0%
Exceptional
96.8%
9th Grade
Exceptional
96.3%
Exceptional
96.1%
10th Grade
Exceptional
95.4%
Exceptional
95.2%
11th Grade
Exceptional
94.5%
Exceptional
94.1%
12th Grade, No Diploma
Exceptional
93.3%
Exceptional
92.8%
High School Diploma
Exceptional
91.7%
Exceptional
91.0%
GED/Equivalency
Exceptional
88.6%
Exceptional
87.7%
College, Under 1 year
Exceptional
68.2%
Excellent
66.7%
College, 1 year or more
Exceptional
62.1%
Excellent
60.6%
Associate's Degree
Exceptional
48.9%
Excellent
47.6%
Bachelor's Degree
Excellent
39.8%
Good
38.9%
Master's Degree
Good
15.3%
Good
15.5%
Professional Degree
Good
4.6%
Good
4.5%
Doctorate Degree
Excellent
1.9%
Good
1.9%

Luxembourger vs Slavic Disability

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Luxembourger and Slavic communities in the United States are seen in ambulatory disability (5.6% compared to 6.4%, a difference of 13.7%), self-care disability (2.2% compared to 2.5%, a difference of 13.1%), and disability age 5 to 17 (5.3% compared to 5.9%, a difference of 12.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of cognitive disability (16.4% compared to 16.7%, a difference of 1.8%), disability age over 75 (44.8% compared to 46.1%, a difference of 2.9%), and hearing disability (3.2% compared to 3.4%, a difference of 5.6%).
Luxembourger vs Slavic Disability
Disability MetricLuxembourgerSlavic
Disability
Exceptional
11.3%
Tragic
12.4%
Males
Good
11.1%
Tragic
12.2%
Females
Exceptional
11.6%
Tragic
12.6%
Age | Under 5 years
Tragic
1.3%
Tragic
1.4%
Age | 5 to 17 years
Exceptional
5.3%
Tragic
5.9%
Age | 18 to 34 years
Tragic
6.9%
Tragic
7.4%
Age | 35 to 64 years
Exceptional
10.6%
Poor
11.7%
Age | 65 to 74 years
Exceptional
21.4%
Good
23.0%
Age | Over 75 years
Exceptional
44.8%
Exceptional
46.1%
Vision
Exceptional
1.9%
Average
2.2%
Hearing
Tragic
3.2%
Tragic
3.4%
Cognitive
Exceptional
16.4%
Exceptional
16.7%
Ambulatory
Exceptional
5.6%
Tragic
6.4%
Self-Care
Exceptional
2.2%
Fair
2.5%