Marshallese vs Immigrants from China Community Comparison

COMPARE

Marshallese
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 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 AmericaChileColombiaCongoCosta 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
Immigrants from China
Race
Ancestry
AfghanAfricanAlaska NativeAlaskan AthabascanAlbanianAleutAlsatianAmericanApacheArabArapahoArgentineanArmenianAssyrian/Chaldean/SyriacAustralianAustrianBahamianBangladeshiBarbadianBasqueBelgianBelizeanBermudanBhutaneseBlackfeetBolivianBrazilianBritishBritish West IndianBulgarianBurmeseCajunCambodianCanadianCape VerdeanCarpatho RusynCelticCentral AmericanCentral American IndianCherokeeCheyenneChickasawChileanChineseChippewaChoctawColombianColvilleComancheCosta RicanCreeCreekCroatianCrowCubanCzechCzechoslovakianDanishDelawareDominicanDutchDutch West IndianEastern EuropeanEcuadorianEgyptianEnglishEstonianEthiopianEuropeanFijianFilipinoFinnishFrenchFrench American IndianFrench CanadianGermanGerman RussianGhanaianGreekGuamanian/ChamorroGuatemalanGuyaneseHaitianHonduranHopiHungarianIcelanderIndian (Asian)IndonesianInupiatIranianIraqiIrishIroquoisIsraeliItalianJamaicanJapaneseJordanianKenyanKiowaKoreanLaotianLatvianLebaneseLiberianLithuanianLumbeeLuxembourgerMacedonianMalaysianMalteseMexicanMexican American IndianMongolianMoroccanNative HawaiianNavajoNepaleseNew ZealanderNicaraguanNigerianNorthern EuropeanNorwegianOkinawanOsageOttawaPaiutePakistaniPalestinianPanamanianParaguayanPennsylvania GermanPeruvianPimaPolishPortuguesePotawatomiPuebloPuerto RicanPuget Sound SalishRomanianRussianSalvadoranSamoanScandinavianScotch-IrishScottishSeminoleSenegaleseSerbianShoshoneSierra LeoneanSiouxSlavicSlovakSloveneSomaliSouth AfricanSouth AmericanSouth American IndianSpaniardSpanishSpanish AmericanSpanish American IndianSri LankanSubsaharan AfricanSudaneseSwedishSwissSyrianTaiwaneseThaiTlingit-HaidaTohono O'OdhamTonganTrinidadian and TobagonianTsimshianTurkishUgandanUkrainianUteVenezuelanVietnameseWelshWest 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 LankaSudanSwedenSwitzerlandSyriaTaiwanThailandTrinidad and TobagoTurkeyUgandaUkraineUzbekistanVenezuelaVietnamWestern AfricaWestern AsiaWestern EuropeYemenZaireZimbabwe
Social Comparison
Social Comparison
Income
Poverty
Unemployment
Labor Participation
Family Structure
Vehicle Availability
Education Level
Disability

Social Comparison

Marshallese

Immigrants from China

Fair
Good
2,873
SOCIAL INDEX
26.3/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
240th/ 347
SOCIAL RANK
7,289
SOCIAL INDEX
70.4/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
125th/ 347
SOCIAL RANK

Immigrants from China Integration in Marshallese Communities

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 14,345,820 people shows a poor negative correlation between the proportion of Immigrants from China within Marshallese communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of -0.195. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Marshallese within a typical geography, there is a decrease of 0.312% in Immigrants from China. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Marshallese corresponds to a decrease of 312.0 Immigrants from China.
Marshallese Integration in Immigrants from China Communities

Marshallese vs Immigrants from China Income

When considering income, the most significant differences between Marshallese and Immigrants from China communities in the United States are seen in householder income ages 25 - 44 years ($83,575 compared to $119,756, a difference of 43.3%), median male earnings ($48,137 compared to $67,353, a difference of 39.9%), and per capita income ($39,108 compared to $54,264, a difference of 38.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of householder income over 65 years ($65,874 compared to $69,174, a difference of 5.0%), wage/income gap (23.4% compared to 26.7%, a difference of 13.9%), and householder income under 25 years ($50,627 compared to $57,931, a difference of 14.4%).
Marshallese vs Immigrants from China Income
Income MetricMarshalleseImmigrants from China
Per Capita Income
Tragic
$39,108
Exceptional
$54,264
Median Family Income
Tragic
$95,293
Exceptional
$125,540
Median Household Income
Tragic
$78,930
Exceptional
$105,335
Median Earnings
Tragic
$41,969
Exceptional
$56,638
Median Male Earnings
Tragic
$48,137
Exceptional
$67,353
Median Female Earnings
Tragic
$36,459
Exceptional
$46,972
Householder Age | Under 25 years
Tragic
$50,627
Exceptional
$57,931
Householder Age | 25 - 44 years
Tragic
$83,575
Exceptional
$119,756
Householder Age | 45 - 64 years
Tragic
$90,455
Exceptional
$122,178
Householder Age | Over 65 years
Exceptional
$65,874
Exceptional
$69,174
Wage/Income Gap
Exceptional
23.4%
Poor
26.7%

Marshallese vs Immigrants from China Poverty

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Marshallese and Immigrants from China communities in the United States are seen in receiving food stamps (14.1% compared to 9.6%, a difference of 47.3%), child poverty under the age of 5 (19.7% compared to 13.6%, a difference of 45.0%), and single male poverty (16.4% compared to 11.4%, a difference of 44.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of female poverty among 18-24 year olds (20.9% compared to 20.2%, a difference of 3.7%), married-couple family poverty (5.2% compared to 5.0%, a difference of 5.5%), and seniors poverty over the age of 65 (10.2% compared to 11.5%, a difference of 12.5%).
Marshallese vs Immigrants from China Poverty
Poverty MetricMarshalleseImmigrants from China
Poverty
Tragic
13.4%
Exceptional
11.6%
Families
Tragic
9.9%
Exceptional
7.8%
Males
Tragic
12.5%
Excellent
10.7%
Females
Tragic
14.4%
Exceptional
12.5%
Females 18 to 24 years
Tragic
20.9%
Average
20.2%
Females 25 to 34 years
Tragic
15.3%
Exceptional
11.2%
Children Under 5 years
Tragic
19.7%
Exceptional
13.6%
Children Under 16 years
Tragic
18.1%
Exceptional
13.3%
Boys Under 16 years
Tragic
18.4%
Exceptional
13.6%
Girls Under 16 years
Tragic
18.7%
Exceptional
13.4%
Single Males
Tragic
16.4%
Exceptional
11.4%
Single Females
Tragic
23.3%
Exceptional
18.1%
Single Fathers
Tragic
16.9%
Exceptional
14.9%
Single Mothers
Tragic
32.1%
Exceptional
26.1%
Married Couples
Average
5.2%
Excellent
5.0%
Seniors Over 65 years
Exceptional
10.2%
Tragic
11.5%
Seniors Over 75 years
Exceptional
10.7%
Tragic
13.2%
Receiving Food Stamps
Tragic
14.1%
Exceptional
9.6%

Marshallese vs Immigrants from China Unemployment

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Marshallese and Immigrants from China communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among women with children under 6 years (9.6% compared to 6.2%, a difference of 53.8%), unemployment among ages 30 to 34 years (7.2% compared to 5.1%, a difference of 41.3%), and unemployment among ages 60 to 64 years (3.7% compared to 5.1%, a difference of 35.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among ages 16 to 19 years (17.6% compared to 17.5%, a difference of 1.1%), unemployment among ages 45 to 54 years (4.5% compared to 4.5%, a difference of 1.2%), and unemployment among seniors over 65 years (5.3% compared to 5.2%, a difference of 1.5%).
Marshallese vs Immigrants from China Unemployment
Unemployment MetricMarshalleseImmigrants from China
Unemployment
Tragic
5.6%
Good
5.2%
Males
Tragic
5.7%
Good
5.2%
Females
Tragic
5.6%
Good
5.2%
Youth < 25
Poor
11.8%
Average
11.6%
Age | 16 to 19 years
Average
17.6%
Good
17.5%
Age | 20 to 24 years
Tragic
11.0%
Fair
10.4%
Age | 25 to 29 years
Exceptional
6.4%
Exceptional
6.2%
Age | 30 to 34 years
Tragic
7.2%
Exceptional
5.1%
Age | 35 to 44 years
Tragic
5.9%
Exceptional
4.4%
Age | 45 to 54 years
Good
4.5%
Average
4.5%
Age | 55 to 59 years
Tragic
5.5%
Tragic
5.0%
Age | 60 to 64 years
Exceptional
3.7%
Tragic
5.1%
Age | 65 to 74 years
Tragic
5.7%
Fair
5.4%
Seniors > 65
Tragic
5.3%
Poor
5.2%
Seniors > 75
Exceptional
8.2%
Exceptional
7.8%
Women w/ Children < 6
Tragic
9.6%
Exceptional
6.2%
Women w/ Children 6 to 17
Exceptional
8.3%
Exceptional
7.7%
Women w/ Children < 18
Fair
5.6%
Exceptional
4.9%

Marshallese vs Immigrants from China Labor Participation

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Marshallese and Immigrants from China communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (39.5% compared to 31.1%, a difference of 26.7%), in labor force | age 20-24 (77.4% compared to 71.1%, a difference of 9.0%), and in labor force | age 30-34 (79.2% compared to 85.4%, a difference of 7.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 25-29 (83.3% compared to 84.6%, a difference of 1.5%), in labor force | age > 16 (64.2% compared to 65.4%, a difference of 1.8%), and in labor force | age 20-64 (78.3% compared to 79.7%, a difference of 1.8%).
Marshallese vs Immigrants from China Labor Participation
Labor Participation MetricMarshalleseImmigrants from China
In Labor Force | Age > 16
Tragic
64.2%
Excellent
65.4%
In Labor Force | Age 20-64
Tragic
78.3%
Good
79.7%
In Labor Force | Age 16-19
Exceptional
39.5%
Tragic
31.1%
In Labor Force | Age 20-24
Exceptional
77.4%
Tragic
71.1%
In Labor Force | Age 25-29
Tragic
83.3%
Average
84.6%
In Labor Force | Age 30-34
Tragic
79.2%
Exceptional
85.4%
In Labor Force | Age 35-44
Tragic
82.4%
Exceptional
84.7%
In Labor Force | Age 45-54
Tragic
80.3%
Exceptional
83.2%

Marshallese vs Immigrants from China Family Structure

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Marshallese and Immigrants from China communities in the United States are seen in births to unmarried women (34.8% compared to 24.7%, a difference of 40.8%), single father households (2.4% compared to 1.8%, a difference of 31.8%), and single mother households (6.3% compared to 5.1%, a difference of 25.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of family households (63.7% compared to 64.7%, a difference of 1.5%), family households with children (26.2% compared to 27.4%, a difference of 4.6%), and average family size (3.38 compared to 3.23, a difference of 4.7%).
Marshallese vs Immigrants from China Family Structure
Family Structure MetricMarshalleseImmigrants from China
Family Households
Tragic
63.7%
Excellent
64.7%
Family Households with Children
Tragic
26.2%
Average
27.4%
Married-couple Households
Tragic
44.6%
Exceptional
48.4%
Average Family Size
Exceptional
3.38
Average
3.23
Single Father Households
Tragic
2.4%
Exceptional
1.8%
Single Mother Households
Average
6.3%
Exceptional
5.1%
Currently Married
Tragic
45.5%
Exceptional
47.9%
Divorced or Separated
Good
12.0%
Exceptional
10.0%
Births to Unmarried Women
Tragic
34.8%
Exceptional
24.7%

Marshallese vs Immigrants from China Vehicle Availability

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Marshallese and Immigrants from China communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (9.8% compared to 15.2%, a difference of 54.3%), 4 or more vehicles in household (8.1% compared to 6.0%, a difference of 35.0%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (21.3% compared to 18.2%, a difference of 16.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (90.4% compared to 84.9%, a difference of 6.5%), 2 or more vehicles in household (54.9% compared to 51.5%, a difference of 6.6%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (21.3% compared to 18.2%, a difference of 16.9%).
Marshallese vs Immigrants from China Vehicle Availability
Vehicle Availability MetricMarshalleseImmigrants from China
No Vehicles Available
Excellent
9.8%
Tragic
15.2%
1+ Vehicles Available
Excellent
90.4%
Tragic
84.9%
2+ Vehicles Available
Fair
54.9%
Tragic
51.5%
3+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
21.3%
Tragic
18.2%
4+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
8.1%
Poor
6.0%

Marshallese vs Immigrants from China Education Level

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Marshallese and Immigrants from China communities in the United States are seen in doctorate degree (1.5% compared to 3.1%, a difference of 111.6%), master's degree (11.6% compared to 21.2%, a difference of 83.0%), and professional degree (3.8% compared to 6.7%, a difference of 79.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 11th grade (92.3% compared to 92.3%, a difference of 0.010%), 10th grade (93.6% compared to 93.2%, a difference of 0.47%), and 9th grade (94.7% compared to 94.3%, a difference of 0.48%).
Marshallese vs Immigrants from China Education Level
Education Level MetricMarshalleseImmigrants from China
No Schooling Completed
Excellent
2.0%
Tragic
2.6%
Nursery School
Excellent
98.1%
Tragic
97.5%
Kindergarten
Excellent
98.1%
Tragic
97.4%
1st Grade
Excellent
98.0%
Tragic
97.4%
2nd Grade
Good
97.9%
Tragic
97.3%
3rd Grade
Average
97.8%
Tragic
97.2%
4th Grade
Good
97.6%
Tragic
97.0%
5th Grade
Good
97.4%
Tragic
96.8%
6th Grade
Good
97.1%
Tragic
96.4%
7th Grade
Average
96.0%
Tragic
95.3%
8th Grade
Average
95.7%
Tragic
95.0%
9th Grade
Fair
94.7%
Tragic
94.3%
10th Grade
Fair
93.6%
Tragic
93.2%
11th Grade
Fair
92.3%
Fair
92.3%
12th Grade, No Diploma
Poor
90.7%
Good
91.3%
High School Diploma
Poor
88.6%
Good
89.3%
GED/Equivalency
Poor
84.9%
Exceptional
86.9%
College, Under 1 year
Tragic
61.9%
Exceptional
70.9%
College, 1 year or more
Tragic
55.8%
Exceptional
66.4%
Associate's Degree
Tragic
41.6%
Exceptional
55.5%
Bachelor's Degree
Tragic
31.7%
Exceptional
48.4%
Master's Degree
Tragic
11.6%
Exceptional
21.2%
Professional Degree
Tragic
3.8%
Exceptional
6.7%
Doctorate Degree
Tragic
1.5%
Exceptional
3.1%

Marshallese vs Immigrants from China Disability

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Marshallese and Immigrants from China communities in the United States are seen in hearing disability (3.8% compared to 2.6%, a difference of 45.1%), disability age 35 to 64 (12.5% compared to 8.7%, a difference of 44.1%), and male disability (12.9% compared to 9.5%, a difference of 35.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of disability age under 5 (0.94% compared to 0.96%, a difference of 2.8%), cognitive disability (17.7% compared to 16.9%, a difference of 4.7%), and disability age over 75 (50.1% compared to 46.3%, a difference of 8.1%).
Marshallese vs Immigrants from China Disability
Disability MetricMarshalleseImmigrants from China
Disability
Tragic
13.1%
Exceptional
10.1%
Males
Tragic
12.9%
Exceptional
9.5%
Females
Tragic
13.3%
Exceptional
10.7%
Age | Under 5 years
Exceptional
0.94%
Exceptional
0.96%
Age | 5 to 17 years
Fair
5.7%
Exceptional
4.5%
Age | 18 to 34 years
Tragic
7.1%
Exceptional
5.4%
Age | 35 to 64 years
Tragic
12.5%
Exceptional
8.7%
Age | 65 to 74 years
Tragic
25.3%
Exceptional
20.3%
Age | Over 75 years
Tragic
50.1%
Exceptional
46.3%
Vision
Tragic
2.3%
Exceptional
1.8%
Hearing
Tragic
3.8%
Exceptional
2.6%
Cognitive
Tragic
17.7%
Exceptional
16.9%
Ambulatory
Tragic
6.9%
Exceptional
5.3%
Self-Care
Tragic
2.6%
Exceptional
2.3%