Portuguese vs Chinese Community Comparison

COMPARE

Portuguese
Race
Ancestry
AfghanAfricanAlaska NativeAlaskan AthabascanAlbanianAleutAlsatianAmericanApacheArabArapahoArgentineanArmenianAssyrian/Chaldean/SyriacAustralianAustrianBahamianBangladeshiBarbadianBasqueBelgianBelizeanBermudanBhutaneseBlackfeetBolivianBrazilianBritishBritish West IndianBulgarianBurmeseCajunCambodianCanadianCape VerdeanCarpatho RusynCelticCentral AmericanCentral American IndianCherokeeCheyenneChickasawChileanChippewaChoctawColombianColvilleComancheCosta RicanCreeCreekCroatianCubanCypriotCzechCzechoslovakianDanishDelawareDominicanDutchDutch West IndianEastern EuropeanEcuadorianEgyptianEnglishEstonianEthiopianEuropeanFijianFilipinoFinnishFrenchFrench American IndianFrench CanadianGermanGerman RussianGhanaianGreekGuamanian/ChamorroGuatemalanGuyaneseHaitianHmongHonduranHungarianIcelanderIndian (Asian)IndonesianInupiatIranianIraqiIrishIroquoisIsraeliItalianJamaicanJapaneseJordanianKenyanKiowaKoreanLaotianLatvianLebaneseLiberianLithuanianLuxembourgerMacedonianMalaysianMalteseMarshalleseMenomineeMexicanMexican 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 TobagonianTurkishU.S. Virgin IslanderUgandanUkrainianUruguayanVenezuelanVietnameseWelshWest IndianYakamaYaquiYugoslavianYumanYup'ikZimbabwean
Immigration
NonimmigrantsImmigrantsAfghanistanAfricaAlbaniaArgentinaArmeniaAsiaAustraliaAustriaBahamasBangladeshBarbadosBelarusBelgiumBelizeBoliviaBosnia and HerzegovinaBrazilBulgariaBurma/MyanmarCambodiaCameroonCanadaCaribbeanCentral 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
Chinese
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 GermanPeruvianPimaPolishPotawatomiPuebloPuerto 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

Portuguese

Chinese

Average
Exceptional
4,363
SOCIAL INDEX
41.1/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
201st/ 347
SOCIAL RANK
9,296
SOCIAL INDEX
90.4/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
23rd/ 347
SOCIAL RANK

Chinese Integration in Portuguese Communities

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 63,615,991 people shows a moderate positive correlation between the proportion of Chinese within Portuguese communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.410. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Portuguese within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.086% in Chinese. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Portuguese corresponds to an increase of 85.8 Chinese.
Portuguese Integration in Chinese Communities

Portuguese vs Chinese Income

When considering income, the most significant differences between Portuguese and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in householder income over 65 years ($61,440 compared to $77,465, a difference of 26.1%), median household income ($88,976 compared to $98,496, a difference of 10.7%), and householder income ages 45 - 64 years ($105,309 compared to $116,156, a difference of 10.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of median male earnings ($56,663 compared to $56,872, a difference of 0.37%), median earnings ($48,032 compared to $48,836, a difference of 1.7%), and median female earnings ($40,177 compared to $41,461, a difference of 3.2%).
Portuguese vs Chinese Income
Income MetricPortugueseChinese
Per Capita Income
Good
$44,362
Exceptional
$46,098
Median Family Income
Excellent
$106,286
Exceptional
$116,188
Median Household Income
Exceptional
$88,976
Exceptional
$98,496
Median Earnings
Exceptional
$48,032
Exceptional
$48,836
Median Male Earnings
Excellent
$56,663
Exceptional
$56,872
Median Female Earnings
Good
$40,177
Exceptional
$41,461
Householder Age | Under 25 years
Exceptional
$54,436
Exceptional
$58,162
Householder Age | 25 - 44 years
Exceptional
$99,429
Exceptional
$104,264
Householder Age | 45 - 64 years
Exceptional
$105,309
Exceptional
$116,156
Householder Age | Over 65 years
Good
$61,440
Exceptional
$77,465
Wage/Income Gap
Tragic
27.4%
Average
25.9%

Portuguese vs Chinese Poverty

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Portuguese and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in seniors poverty over the age of 75 (12.1% compared to 9.1%, a difference of 33.2%), child poverty among boys under 16 (15.5% compared to 11.9%, a difference of 31.0%), and family poverty (8.4% compared to 6.5%, a difference of 28.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of single father poverty (16.2% compared to 15.4%, a difference of 5.2%), female poverty among 18-24 year olds (17.8% compared to 16.2%, a difference of 9.9%), and single mother poverty (28.8% compared to 24.6%, a difference of 17.0%).
Portuguese vs Chinese Poverty
Poverty MetricPortugueseChinese
Poverty
Exceptional
11.6%
Exceptional
9.5%
Families
Excellent
8.4%
Exceptional
6.5%
Males
Exceptional
10.6%
Exceptional
8.7%
Females
Exceptional
12.6%
Exceptional
10.4%
Females 18 to 24 years
Exceptional
17.8%
Exceptional
16.2%
Females 25 to 34 years
Average
13.6%
Exceptional
11.0%
Children Under 5 years
Excellent
16.5%
Exceptional
13.1%
Children Under 16 years
Exceptional
15.1%
Exceptional
11.9%
Boys Under 16 years
Excellent
15.5%
Exceptional
11.9%
Girls Under 16 years
Exceptional
15.3%
Exceptional
12.3%
Single Males
Fair
12.9%
Exceptional
11.0%
Single Females
Excellent
20.5%
Exceptional
16.1%
Single Fathers
Good
16.2%
Exceptional
15.4%
Single Mothers
Good
28.8%
Exceptional
24.6%
Married Couples
Exceptional
4.6%
Exceptional
3.6%
Seniors Over 65 years
Excellent
10.5%
Exceptional
8.3%
Seniors Over 75 years
Good
12.1%
Exceptional
9.1%
Receiving Food Stamps
Fair
12.2%
Exceptional
9.8%

Portuguese vs Chinese Unemployment

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Portuguese and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among seniors over 75 years (10.4% compared to 5.9%, a difference of 76.0%), unemployment among seniors over 65 years (5.6% compared to 4.2%, a difference of 33.6%), and unemployment among ages 65 to 74 years (5.7% compared to 4.4%, a difference of 29.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among women with children ages 6 to 17 years (9.4% compared to 9.3%, a difference of 1.7%), unemployment among ages 16 to 19 years (17.4% compared to 16.0%, a difference of 8.6%), and unemployment among youth under 25 years (11.7% compared to 10.7%, a difference of 9.3%).
Portuguese vs Chinese Unemployment
Unemployment MetricPortugueseChinese
Unemployment
Poor
5.4%
Exceptional
4.7%
Males
Tragic
5.6%
Exceptional
4.9%
Females
Fair
5.3%
Exceptional
4.5%
Youth < 25
Fair
11.7%
Exceptional
10.7%
Age | 16 to 19 years
Good
17.4%
Exceptional
16.0%
Age | 20 to 24 years
Fair
10.4%
Exceptional
9.4%
Age | 25 to 29 years
Tragic
7.2%
Exceptional
6.1%
Age | 30 to 34 years
Tragic
5.9%
Exceptional
5.1%
Age | 35 to 44 years
Tragic
5.1%
Exceptional
4.3%
Age | 45 to 54 years
Tragic
4.8%
Exceptional
4.0%
Age | 55 to 59 years
Tragic
5.1%
Exceptional
4.4%
Age | 60 to 64 years
Exceptional
4.7%
Exceptional
4.0%
Age | 65 to 74 years
Tragic
5.7%
Exceptional
4.4%
Seniors > 65
Tragic
5.6%
Exceptional
4.2%
Seniors > 75
Tragic
10.4%
Exceptional
5.9%
Women w/ Children < 6
Tragic
8.0%
Exceptional
6.8%
Women w/ Children 6 to 17
Tragic
9.4%
Tragic
9.3%
Women w/ Children < 18
Poor
5.6%
Exceptional
4.9%

Portuguese vs Chinese Labor Participation

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Portuguese and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (40.0% compared to 38.6%, a difference of 3.7%), in labor force | age 45-54 (82.2% compared to 84.1%, a difference of 2.3%), and in labor force | age 20-64 (79.1% compared to 80.7%, a difference of 1.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 25-29 (84.4% compared to 84.3%, a difference of 0.11%), in labor force | age > 16 (64.4% compared to 64.7%, a difference of 0.44%), and in labor force | age 35-44 (84.3% compared to 85.1%, a difference of 0.96%).
Portuguese vs Chinese Labor Participation
Labor Participation MetricPortugueseChinese
In Labor Force | Age > 16
Tragic
64.4%
Tragic
64.7%
In Labor Force | Age 20-64
Tragic
79.1%
Exceptional
80.7%
In Labor Force | Age 16-19
Exceptional
40.0%
Exceptional
38.6%
In Labor Force | Age 20-24
Exceptional
76.4%
Exceptional
77.3%
In Labor Force | Age 25-29
Fair
84.4%
Poor
84.3%
In Labor Force | Age 30-34
Tragic
84.0%
Excellent
85.0%
In Labor Force | Age 35-44
Fair
84.3%
Exceptional
85.1%
In Labor Force | Age 45-54
Tragic
82.2%
Exceptional
84.1%

Portuguese vs Chinese Family Structure

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Portuguese and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in single father households (2.5% compared to 2.0%, a difference of 25.4%), single mother households (6.4% compared to 5.2%, a difference of 23.6%), and births to unmarried women (33.8% compared to 30.2%, a difference of 11.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of family households (65.8% compared to 68.1%, a difference of 3.5%), currently married (47.3% compared to 49.5%, a difference of 4.5%), and average family size (3.19 compared to 3.34, a difference of 4.8%).
Portuguese vs Chinese Family Structure
Family Structure MetricPortugueseChinese
Family Households
Exceptional
65.8%
Exceptional
68.1%
Family Households with Children
Good
27.6%
Tragic
26.0%
Married-couple Households
Exceptional
47.8%
Exceptional
50.4%
Average Family Size
Tragic
3.19
Exceptional
3.34
Single Father Households
Tragic
2.5%
Exceptional
2.0%
Single Mother Households
Fair
6.4%
Exceptional
5.2%
Currently Married
Excellent
47.3%
Exceptional
49.5%
Divorced or Separated
Fair
12.2%
Exceptional
11.2%
Births to Unmarried Women
Tragic
33.8%
Excellent
30.2%

Portuguese vs Chinese Vehicle Availability

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Portuguese and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in 4 or more vehicles in household (7.4% compared to 8.8%, a difference of 19.5%), 3 or more vehicles in household (21.8% compared to 23.9%, a difference of 9.4%), and no vehicles in household (8.6% compared to 8.2%, a difference of 4.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (91.6% compared to 91.9%, a difference of 0.33%), 2 or more vehicles in household (58.6% compared to 60.1%, a difference of 2.5%), and no vehicles in household (8.6% compared to 8.2%, a difference of 4.3%).
Portuguese vs Chinese Vehicle Availability
Vehicle Availability MetricPortugueseChinese
No Vehicles Available
Exceptional
8.6%
Exceptional
8.2%
1+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
91.6%
Exceptional
91.9%
2+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
58.6%
Exceptional
60.1%
3+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
21.8%
Exceptional
23.9%
4+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
7.4%
Exceptional
8.8%

Portuguese vs Chinese Education Level

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Portuguese and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in no schooling completed (2.1% compared to 1.5%, a difference of 43.1%), associate's degree (44.1% compared to 48.5%, a difference of 10.0%), and professional degree (4.1% compared to 4.5%, a difference of 9.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of nursery school (98.0% compared to 98.6%, a difference of 0.62%), kindergarten (97.9% compared to 98.5%, a difference of 0.62%), and 1st grade (97.9% compared to 98.5%, a difference of 0.62%).
Portuguese vs Chinese Education Level
Education Level MetricPortugueseChinese
No Schooling Completed
Average
2.1%
Exceptional
1.5%
Nursery School
Average
98.0%
Exceptional
98.6%
Kindergarten
Average
97.9%
Exceptional
98.5%
1st Grade
Average
97.9%
Exceptional
98.5%
2nd Grade
Average
97.8%
Exceptional
98.5%
3rd Grade
Fair
97.7%
Exceptional
98.4%
4th Grade
Fair
97.4%
Exceptional
98.3%
5th Grade
Tragic
97.1%
Exceptional
98.1%
6th Grade
Tragic
96.8%
Exceptional
97.9%
7th Grade
Poor
95.8%
Exceptional
97.1%
8th Grade
Poor
95.5%
Exceptional
96.9%
9th Grade
Tragic
94.5%
Exceptional
96.3%
10th Grade
Poor
93.3%
Exceptional
95.5%
11th Grade
Tragic
92.0%
Exceptional
94.6%
12th Grade, No Diploma
Poor
90.6%
Exceptional
93.6%
High School Diploma
Poor
88.5%
Exceptional
92.0%
GED/Equivalency
Poor
85.0%
Exceptional
89.0%
College, Under 1 year
Tragic
63.4%
Exceptional
68.3%
College, 1 year or more
Tragic
57.2%
Exceptional
62.2%
Associate's Degree
Tragic
44.1%
Exceptional
48.5%
Bachelor's Degree
Tragic
35.5%
Good
38.5%
Master's Degree
Poor
13.9%
Fair
14.6%
Professional Degree
Poor
4.1%
Average
4.5%
Doctorate Degree
Fair
1.8%
Fair
1.8%

Portuguese vs Chinese Disability

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Portuguese and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in disability age under 5 (1.6% compared to 1.1%, a difference of 41.6%), disability age 5 to 17 (6.1% compared to 4.7%, a difference of 30.3%), and disability age 18 to 34 (7.4% compared to 6.3%, a difference of 16.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of ambulatory disability (6.4% compared to 6.5%, a difference of 1.7%), male disability (12.3% compared to 12.1%, a difference of 1.8%), and self-care disability (2.6% compared to 2.6%, a difference of 2.2%).
Portuguese vs Chinese Disability
Disability MetricPortugueseChinese
Disability
Tragic
12.6%
Tragic
12.2%
Males
Tragic
12.3%
Tragic
12.1%
Females
Tragic
13.0%
Fair
12.3%
Age | Under 5 years
Tragic
1.6%
Exceptional
1.1%
Age | 5 to 17 years
Tragic
6.1%
Exceptional
4.7%
Age | 18 to 34 years
Tragic
7.4%
Exceptional
6.3%
Age | 35 to 64 years
Tragic
11.9%
Exceptional
10.3%
Age | 65 to 74 years
Fair
23.5%
Exceptional
21.7%
Age | Over 75 years
Fair
47.6%
Tragic
48.7%
Vision
Tragic
2.3%
Exceptional
2.0%
Hearing
Tragic
3.5%
Tragic
3.7%
Cognitive
Exceptional
16.9%
Exceptional
15.9%
Ambulatory
Tragic
6.4%
Tragic
6.5%
Self-Care
Tragic
2.6%
Tragic
2.6%