Pakistani vs Chickasaw Community Comparison

COMPARE

Pakistani
Race
Ancestry
AfghanAfricanAlaska NativeAlaskan AthabascanAlbanianAleutAlsatianAmericanApacheArabArapahoArgentineanArmenianAssyrian/Chaldean/SyriacAustralianAustrianBahamianBangladeshiBarbadianBasqueBelgianBelizeanBermudanBhutaneseBlackfeetBolivianBrazilianBritishBritish West IndianBulgarianBurmeseCajunCambodianCanadianCape VerdeanCarpatho RusynCelticCentral AmericanCentral American IndianCherokeeCheyenneChileanChineseChippewaChoctawColombianColvilleComancheCosta 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 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
Chickasaw
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 EuropeanNorwegianOkinawanOsageOttawaPaiutePalestinianPanamanianParaguayanPennsylvania 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

Pakistanis

Chickasaw

Good
Fair
8,084
SOCIAL INDEX
78.3/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
88th/ 347
SOCIAL RANK
3,663
SOCIAL INDEX
34.2/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
212th/ 347
SOCIAL RANK

Chickasaw Integration in Pakistani Communities

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 125,289,145 people shows a strong positive correlation between the proportion of Chickasaw within Pakistani communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.752. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Pakistanis within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.859% in Chickasaw. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Pakistanis corresponds to an increase of 859.1 Chickasaw.
Pakistani Integration in Chickasaw Communities

Pakistani vs Chickasaw Income

When considering income, the most significant differences between Pakistani and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in householder income ages 45 - 64 years ($105,317 compared to $82,193, a difference of 28.1%), median household income ($89,638 compared to $70,005, a difference of 28.0%), and householder income ages 25 - 44 years ($98,401 compared to $77,929, a difference of 26.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of wage/income gap (26.1% compared to 27.2%, a difference of 4.3%), median female earnings ($40,596 compared to $34,414, a difference of 18.0%), and median male earnings ($56,719 compared to $47,832, a difference of 18.6%).
Pakistani vs Chickasaw Income
Income MetricPakistaniChickasaw
Per Capita Income
Excellent
$45,587
Tragic
$36,475
Median Family Income
Exceptional
$107,390
Tragic
$85,356
Median Household Income
Exceptional
$89,638
Tragic
$70,005
Median Earnings
Exceptional
$48,254
Tragic
$40,672
Median Male Earnings
Excellent
$56,719
Tragic
$47,832
Median Female Earnings
Excellent
$40,596
Tragic
$34,414
Householder Age | Under 25 years
Exceptional
$53,325
Tragic
$44,763
Householder Age | 25 - 44 years
Excellent
$98,401
Tragic
$77,929
Householder Age | 45 - 64 years
Exceptional
$105,317
Tragic
$82,193
Householder Age | Over 65 years
Exceptional
$63,844
Tragic
$53,732
Wage/Income Gap
Fair
26.1%
Tragic
27.2%

Pakistani vs Chickasaw Poverty

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Pakistani and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in child poverty under the age of 5 (16.0% compared to 21.8%, a difference of 36.5%), single male poverty (12.4% compared to 16.3%, a difference of 31.8%), and female poverty among 25-34 year olds (13.0% compared to 17.0%, a difference of 31.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of seniors poverty over the age of 75 (11.8% compared to 11.6%, a difference of 1.2%), seniors poverty over the age of 65 (10.3% compared to 10.7%, a difference of 3.4%), and single father poverty (15.7% compared to 19.0%, a difference of 20.5%).
Pakistani vs Chickasaw Poverty
Poverty MetricPakistaniChickasaw
Poverty
Excellent
11.9%
Tragic
14.7%
Families
Exceptional
8.3%
Tragic
10.8%
Males
Excellent
10.8%
Tragic
13.5%
Females
Excellent
12.9%
Tragic
15.9%
Females 18 to 24 years
Good
19.8%
Tragic
24.5%
Females 25 to 34 years
Excellent
13.0%
Tragic
17.0%
Children Under 5 years
Exceptional
16.0%
Tragic
21.8%
Children Under 16 years
Exceptional
15.0%
Tragic
19.5%
Boys Under 16 years
Exceptional
15.1%
Tragic
19.8%
Girls Under 16 years
Exceptional
15.3%
Tragic
19.6%
Single Males
Exceptional
12.4%
Tragic
16.3%
Single Females
Exceptional
20.2%
Tragic
26.3%
Single Fathers
Exceptional
15.7%
Tragic
19.0%
Single Mothers
Exceptional
28.0%
Tragic
34.4%
Married Couples
Exceptional
4.7%
Tragic
5.8%
Seniors Over 65 years
Exceptional
10.3%
Good
10.7%
Seniors Over 75 years
Excellent
11.8%
Exceptional
11.6%
Receiving Food Stamps
Exceptional
10.4%
Tragic
13.1%

Pakistani vs Chickasaw Unemployment

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Pakistani and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among women with children under 6 years (7.3% compared to 9.0%, a difference of 22.2%), unemployment among seniors over 75 years (8.9% compared to 7.3%, a difference of 20.8%), and unemployment among seniors over 65 years (5.1% compared to 4.4%, a difference of 15.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of female unemployment (5.1% compared to 5.1%, a difference of 0.060%), male unemployment (5.2% compared to 5.2%, a difference of 0.24%), and unemployment among youth under 25 years (11.3% compared to 11.2%, a difference of 1.1%).
Pakistani vs Chickasaw Unemployment
Unemployment MetricPakistaniChickasaw
Unemployment
Excellent
5.1%
Exceptional
5.0%
Males
Excellent
5.2%
Excellent
5.2%
Females
Excellent
5.1%
Excellent
5.1%
Youth < 25
Exceptional
11.3%
Exceptional
11.2%
Age | 16 to 19 years
Excellent
17.2%
Exceptional
16.7%
Age | 20 to 24 years
Exceptional
9.8%
Exceptional
9.9%
Age | 25 to 29 years
Excellent
6.5%
Fair
6.7%
Age | 30 to 34 years
Good
5.4%
Tragic
6.2%
Age | 35 to 44 years
Good
4.6%
Tragic
4.9%
Age | 45 to 54 years
Exceptional
4.4%
Exceptional
4.2%
Age | 55 to 59 years
Excellent
4.7%
Good
4.8%
Age | 60 to 64 years
Good
4.8%
Exceptional
4.3%
Age | 65 to 74 years
Excellent
5.3%
Exceptional
4.7%
Seniors > 65
Good
5.1%
Exceptional
4.4%
Seniors > 75
Fair
8.9%
Exceptional
7.3%
Women w/ Children < 6
Exceptional
7.3%
Tragic
9.0%
Women w/ Children 6 to 17
Exceptional
8.4%
Exceptional
8.6%
Women w/ Children < 18
Excellent
5.2%
Good
5.4%

Pakistani vs Chickasaw Labor Participation

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Pakistani and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age > 16 (65.8% compared to 62.3%, a difference of 5.6%), in labor force | age 45-54 (82.8% compared to 79.0%, a difference of 4.7%), and in labor force | age 20-64 (79.8% compared to 76.2%, a difference of 4.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 20-24 (75.8% compared to 74.5%, a difference of 1.8%), in labor force | age 16-19 (37.6% compared to 38.3%, a difference of 2.1%), and in labor force | age 30-34 (84.7% compared to 81.9%, a difference of 3.5%).
Pakistani vs Chickasaw Labor Participation
Labor Participation MetricPakistaniChickasaw
In Labor Force | Age > 16
Exceptional
65.8%
Tragic
62.3%
In Labor Force | Age 20-64
Good
79.8%
Tragic
76.2%
In Labor Force | Age 16-19
Excellent
37.6%
Exceptional
38.3%
In Labor Force | Age 20-24
Exceptional
75.8%
Poor
74.5%
In Labor Force | Age 25-29
Good
84.8%
Tragic
81.9%
In Labor Force | Age 30-34
Good
84.7%
Tragic
81.9%
In Labor Force | Age 35-44
Average
84.4%
Tragic
80.9%
In Labor Force | Age 45-54
Average
82.8%
Tragic
79.0%

Pakistani vs Chickasaw Family Structure

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Pakistani and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in single father households (2.3% compared to 2.8%, a difference of 19.6%), divorced or separated (11.9% compared to 14.2%, a difference of 19.4%), and births to unmarried women (30.5% compared to 36.3%, a difference of 19.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of family households (64.7% compared to 64.4%, a difference of 0.40%), average family size (3.22 compared to 3.19, a difference of 0.95%), and family households with children (27.9% compared to 28.2%, a difference of 1.1%).
Pakistani vs Chickasaw Family Structure
Family Structure MetricPakistaniChickasaw
Family Households
Excellent
64.7%
Good
64.4%
Family Households with Children
Exceptional
27.9%
Exceptional
28.2%
Married-couple Households
Excellent
47.3%
Fair
45.9%
Average Family Size
Fair
3.22
Tragic
3.19
Single Father Households
Good
2.3%
Tragic
2.8%
Single Mother Households
Good
6.1%
Tragic
7.0%
Currently Married
Good
47.2%
Average
46.6%
Divorced or Separated
Excellent
11.9%
Tragic
14.2%
Births to Unmarried Women
Excellent
30.5%
Tragic
36.3%

Pakistani vs Chickasaw Vehicle Availability

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Pakistani and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (9.0% compared to 7.9%, a difference of 14.2%), 4 or more vehicles in household (7.0% compared to 7.4%, a difference of 6.0%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (21.0% compared to 22.2%, a difference of 5.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (91.3% compared to 92.3%, a difference of 1.1%), 2 or more vehicles in household (57.9% compared to 59.0%, a difference of 1.9%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (21.0% compared to 22.2%, a difference of 5.5%).
Pakistani vs Chickasaw Vehicle Availability
Vehicle Availability MetricPakistaniChickasaw
No Vehicles Available
Exceptional
9.0%
Exceptional
7.9%
1+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
91.3%
Exceptional
92.3%
2+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
57.9%
Exceptional
59.0%
3+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
21.0%
Exceptional
22.2%
4+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
7.0%
Exceptional
7.4%

Pakistani vs Chickasaw Education Level

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Pakistani and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in professional degree (4.8% compared to 3.4%, a difference of 42.0%), master's degree (15.8% compared to 11.4%, a difference of 38.3%), and doctorate degree (2.0% compared to 1.5%, a difference of 35.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 10th grade (93.9% compared to 94.1%, a difference of 0.16%), nursery school (97.9% compared to 98.4%, a difference of 0.46%), and kindergarten (97.9% compared to 98.4%, a difference of 0.47%).
Pakistani vs Chickasaw Education Level
Education Level MetricPakistaniChickasaw
No Schooling Completed
Average
2.1%
Exceptional
1.7%
Nursery School
Fair
97.9%
Exceptional
98.4%
Kindergarten
Fair
97.9%
Exceptional
98.4%
1st Grade
Fair
97.9%
Exceptional
98.3%
2nd Grade
Fair
97.8%
Exceptional
98.3%
3rd Grade
Fair
97.7%
Exceptional
98.2%
4th Grade
Fair
97.5%
Exceptional
98.0%
5th Grade
Average
97.3%
Exceptional
97.9%
6th Grade
Average
97.0%
Exceptional
97.6%
7th Grade
Average
96.0%
Exceptional
96.7%
8th Grade
Average
95.7%
Exceptional
96.4%
9th Grade
Good
95.0%
Exceptional
95.5%
10th Grade
Good
93.9%
Excellent
94.1%
11th Grade
Good
92.8%
Fair
92.3%
12th Grade, No Diploma
Good
91.5%
Tragic
90.3%
High School Diploma
Good
89.6%
Poor
88.4%
GED/Equivalency
Excellent
86.4%
Tragic
83.8%
College, Under 1 year
Exceptional
67.5%
Tragic
60.4%
College, 1 year or more
Exceptional
61.5%
Tragic
53.3%
Associate's Degree
Excellent
48.1%
Tragic
38.6%
Bachelor's Degree
Excellent
39.7%
Tragic
30.4%
Master's Degree
Excellent
15.8%
Tragic
11.4%
Professional Degree
Exceptional
4.8%
Tragic
3.4%
Doctorate Degree
Exceptional
2.0%
Tragic
1.5%

Pakistani vs Chickasaw Disability

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Pakistani and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in vision disability (2.1% compared to 3.2%, a difference of 48.9%), disability age 35 to 64 (11.1% compared to 16.1%, a difference of 44.8%), and hearing disability (3.1% compared to 4.5%, a difference of 42.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of cognitive disability (17.3% compared to 18.5%, a difference of 6.9%), disability age over 75 (47.7% compared to 51.2%, a difference of 7.4%), and self-care disability (2.4% compared to 2.9%, a difference of 17.2%).
Pakistani vs Chickasaw Disability
Disability MetricPakistaniChickasaw
Disability
Average
11.7%
Tragic
15.2%
Males
Fair
11.3%
Tragic
15.1%
Females
Excellent
12.0%
Tragic
15.2%
Age | Under 5 years
Poor
1.3%
Tragic
1.7%
Age | 5 to 17 years
Excellent
5.5%
Tragic
6.8%
Age | 18 to 34 years
Fair
6.7%
Tragic
9.0%
Age | 35 to 64 years
Good
11.1%
Tragic
16.1%
Age | 65 to 74 years
Average
23.2%
Tragic
30.2%
Age | Over 75 years
Fair
47.7%
Tragic
51.2%
Vision
Good
2.1%
Tragic
3.2%
Hearing
Poor
3.1%
Tragic
4.5%
Cognitive
Average
17.3%
Tragic
18.5%
Ambulatory
Excellent
6.0%
Tragic
8.0%
Self-Care
Good
2.4%
Tragic
2.9%