Pima vs Comanche Community Comparison

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 41,329,763 people shows a very strong positive correlation between the proportion of Comanche within Pima communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.850. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Pima within a typical geography, there is an increase of 1.932% in Comanche. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Pima corresponds to an increase of 1,931.8 Comanche.

When considering income, the most significant differences between Pima and Comanche communities in the United States are seen in per capita income ($30,644 compared to $38,088, a difference of 24.3%), wage/income gap (21.1% compared to 25.0%, a difference of 18.6%), and householder income ages 45 - 64 years ($73,365 compared to $85,787, a difference of 16.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of householder income ages 25 - 44 years ($82,821 compared to $82,152, a difference of 0.82%), median female earnings ($35,326 compared to $35,661, a difference of 0.95%), and householder income under 25 years ($51,503 compared to $47,518, a difference of 8.4%).

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Pima and Comanche communities in the United States are seen in married-couple family poverty (11.4% compared to 6.0%, a difference of 90.8%), seniors poverty over the age of 75 (23.9% compared to 12.8%, a difference of 86.1%), and family poverty (18.4% compared to 11.0%, a difference of 66.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of single mother poverty (38.6% compared to 33.9%, a difference of 13.8%), single female poverty (30.3% compared to 25.6%, a difference of 18.6%), and female poverty among 18-24 year olds (28.4% compared to 23.6%, a difference of 20.3%).

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Pima and Comanche communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among ages 35 to 44 years (11.8% compared to 5.2%, a difference of 125.5%), unemployment among women with children ages 6 to 17 years (18.9% compared to 9.0%, a difference of 108.6%), and unemployment among women with children under 18 years (11.7% compared to 6.1%, a difference of 90.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among ages 60 to 64 years (4.8% compared to 5.0%, a difference of 5.5%), unemployment among ages 16 to 19 years (23.1% compared to 20.2%, a difference of 14.3%), and unemployment among ages 55 to 59 years (6.6% compared to 5.1%, a difference of 30.2%).

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Pima and Comanche communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 20-64 (69.0% compared to 77.0%, a difference of 11.6%), in labor force | age > 16 (57.4% compared to 63.6%, a difference of 10.8%), and in labor force | age 16-19 (34.1% compared to 37.7%, a difference of 10.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 30-34 (79.0% compared to 82.6%, a difference of 4.5%), in labor force | age 45-54 (72.8% compared to 79.2%, a difference of 8.7%), and in labor force | age 35-44 (74.8% compared to 81.5%, a difference of 8.9%).

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Pima and Comanche communities in the United States are seen in single father households (4.2% compared to 2.5%, a difference of 64.8%), births to unmarried women (51.5% compared to 36.7%, a difference of 40.2%), and currently married (35.9% compared to 45.0%, a difference of 25.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of family households with children (27.1% compared to 27.6%, a difference of 1.9%), family households (65.9% compared to 63.5%, a difference of 3.9%), and divorced or separated (12.9% compared to 13.5%, a difference of 5.0%).

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Pima and Comanche communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (14.1% compared to 10.2%, a difference of 37.9%), 4 or more vehicles in household (7.9% compared to 6.8%, a difference of 15.8%), and 2 or more vehicles in household (52.0% compared to 56.5%, a difference of 8.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (86.3% compared to 89.9%, a difference of 4.2%), 3 or more vehicles in household (22.0% compared to 21.0%, a difference of 5.1%), and 2 or more vehicles in household (52.0% compared to 56.5%, a difference of 8.6%).

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Pima and Comanche communities in the United States are seen in bachelor's degree (23.2% compared to 31.9%, a difference of 37.5%), associate's degree (30.2% compared to 39.9%, a difference of 32.1%), and master's degree (9.2% compared to 12.1%, a difference of 30.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 8th grade (95.6% compared to 95.5%, a difference of 0.12%), nursery school (98.2% compared to 98.0%, a difference of 0.21%), and kindergarten (98.2% compared to 98.0%, a difference of 0.22%).

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Pima and Comanche communities in the United States are seen in disability age 65 to 74 (38.6% compared to 28.3%, a difference of 36.2%), vision disability (3.3% compared to 2.8%, a difference of 17.2%), and disability age under 5 (1.1% compared to 1.2%, a difference of 17.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of cognitive disability (18.8% compared to 18.6%, a difference of 0.92%), disability (13.7% compared to 14.1%, a difference of 3.0%), and self-care disability (2.8% compared to 2.9%, a difference of 3.3%).