Zimbabwean vs Lithuanian Community Comparison

COMPARE

Zimbabwean
Race
Ancestry
AfghanAfricanAlaska NativeAlaskan AthabascanAlbanianAleutAlsatianAmericanApacheArabArapahoArgentineanArmenianAssyrian/Chaldean/SyriacAustralianAustrianBahamianBangladeshiBarbadianBasqueBelgianBelizeanBermudanBhutaneseBlackfeetBolivianBrazilianBritishBritish West IndianBulgarianBurmeseCajunCambodianCanadianCape VerdeanCarpatho RusynCelticCentral AmericanCentral American IndianCherokeeCheyenneChickasawChileanChineseChippewaChoctawColombianColvilleComancheCosta RicanCreeCreekCroatianCrowCubanCypriotCzechCzechoslovakianDanishDelawareDominicanDutchDutch West IndianEastern EuropeanEcuadorianEgyptianEnglishEstonianEthiopianEuropeanFijianFilipinoFinnishFrenchFrench American IndianFrench CanadianGermanGerman RussianGhanaianGreekGuamanian/ChamorroGuatemalanGuyaneseHaitianHmongHonduranHopiHoumaHungarianIcelanderIndian (Asian)IndonesianInupiatIranianIraqiIrishIroquoisIsraeliItalianJamaicanJapaneseJordanianKenyanKiowaKoreanLaotianLatvianLebaneseLiberianLumbeeLuxembourgerMacedonianMalaysianMalteseMarshalleseMenomineeMexicanMexican 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
Lithuanian
Race
Ancestry
AfghanAfricanAlaska NativeAlaskan AthabascanAlbanianAleutAlsatianAmericanApacheArabArapahoArgentineanArmenianAssyrian/Chaldean/SyriacAustralianAustrianBahamianBangladeshiBarbadianBasqueBelgianBelizeanBermudanBhutaneseBlackfeetBolivianBrazilianBritishBritish West IndianBulgarianBurmeseCajunCambodianCanadianCape VerdeanCarpatho RusynCelticCentral AmericanCentral American IndianCherokeeCheyenneChickasawChileanChineseChippewaChoctawColombianColvilleComancheCosta RicanCreeCreekCroatianCrowCubanCypriotCzechCzechoslovakianDanishDelawareDominicanDutchDutch West IndianEastern EuropeanEcuadorianEgyptianEnglishEstonianEthiopianEuropeanFijianFilipinoFinnishFrenchFrench American IndianFrench CanadianGermanGerman RussianGhanaianGreekGuamanian/ChamorroGuatemalanGuyaneseHaitianHmongHonduranHopiHoumaHungarianIcelanderIndian (Asian)IndonesianInupiatIranianIraqiIrishIroquoisIsraeliItalianJamaicanJapaneseJordanianKenyanKiowaKoreanLaotianLatvianLebaneseLiberianLithuanianLumbeeLuxembourgerMacedonianMalaysianMalteseMenomineeMexicanMexican 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'ik
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

Zimbabweans

Lithuanians

Exceptional
Excellent
9,358
SOCIAL INDEX
91.0/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
18th/ 347
SOCIAL RANK
8,827
SOCIAL INDEX
85.7/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
46th/ 347
SOCIAL RANK

Lithuanian Integration in Zimbabwean Communities

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 66,725,934 people shows a moderate positive correlation between the proportion of Lithuanians within Zimbabwean communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.402. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Zimbabweans within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.177% in Lithuanians. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Zimbabweans corresponds to an increase of 177.1 Lithuanians.
Zimbabwean Integration in Lithuanian Communities

Zimbabwean vs Lithuanian Income

When considering income, the most significant differences between Zimbabwean and Lithuanian communities in the United States are seen in wage/income gap (26.3% compared to 28.7%, a difference of 9.2%), median male earnings ($56,302 compared to $61,228, a difference of 8.7%), and per capita income ($45,804 compared to $49,448, a difference of 8.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of householder income over 65 years ($65,854 compared to $65,209, a difference of 0.99%), median female earnings ($40,798 compared to $42,108, a difference of 3.2%), and median household income ($90,618 compared to $93,852, a difference of 3.6%).
Zimbabwean vs Lithuanian Income
Income MetricZimbabweanLithuanian
Per Capita Income
Exceptional
$45,804
Exceptional
$49,448
Median Family Income
Exceptional
$110,011
Exceptional
$115,395
Median Household Income
Exceptional
$90,618
Exceptional
$93,852
Median Earnings
Exceptional
$48,229
Exceptional
$50,991
Median Male Earnings
Excellent
$56,302
Exceptional
$61,228
Median Female Earnings
Exceptional
$40,798
Exceptional
$42,108
Householder Age | Under 25 years
Tragic
$51,259
Exceptional
$53,552
Householder Age | 25 - 44 years
Exceptional
$98,586
Exceptional
$105,223
Householder Age | 45 - 64 years
Exceptional
$106,849
Exceptional
$112,484
Householder Age | Over 65 years
Exceptional
$65,854
Exceptional
$65,209
Wage/Income Gap
Fair
26.3%
Tragic
28.7%

Zimbabwean vs Lithuanian Poverty

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Zimbabwean and Lithuanian communities in the United States are seen in single father poverty (15.6% compared to 17.3%, a difference of 10.9%), female poverty among 18-24 year olds (20.4% compared to 18.7%, a difference of 9.3%), and family poverty (7.8% compared to 7.2%, a difference of 8.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of child poverty under the age of 5 (15.2% compared to 15.2%, a difference of 0.010%), single male poverty (13.1% compared to 13.0%, a difference of 0.62%), and single female poverty (19.5% compared to 19.2%, a difference of 1.6%).
Zimbabwean vs Lithuanian Poverty
Poverty MetricZimbabweanLithuanian
Poverty
Exceptional
11.3%
Exceptional
10.5%
Families
Exceptional
7.8%
Exceptional
7.2%
Males
Exceptional
10.2%
Exceptional
9.5%
Females
Exceptional
12.3%
Exceptional
11.4%
Females 18 to 24 years
Fair
20.4%
Exceptional
18.7%
Females 25 to 34 years
Exceptional
11.7%
Exceptional
12.2%
Children Under 5 years
Exceptional
15.2%
Exceptional
15.2%
Children Under 16 years
Exceptional
14.2%
Exceptional
13.5%
Boys Under 16 years
Exceptional
14.3%
Exceptional
14.0%
Girls Under 16 years
Exceptional
14.4%
Exceptional
13.9%
Single Males
Poor
13.1%
Fair
13.0%
Single Females
Exceptional
19.5%
Exceptional
19.2%
Single Fathers
Exceptional
15.6%
Tragic
17.3%
Single Mothers
Exceptional
27.9%
Exceptional
27.4%
Married Couples
Exceptional
4.1%
Exceptional
4.0%
Seniors Over 65 years
Exceptional
9.6%
Exceptional
9.1%
Seniors Over 75 years
Exceptional
11.2%
Exceptional
10.6%
Receiving Food Stamps
Exceptional
9.5%
Exceptional
9.7%

Zimbabwean vs Lithuanian Unemployment

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Zimbabwean and Lithuanian communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among seniors over 75 years (8.7% compared to 9.9%, a difference of 13.3%), unemployment among ages 55 to 59 years (4.2% compared to 4.7%, a difference of 11.5%), and unemployment among ages 30 to 34 years (4.8% compared to 5.4%, a difference of 11.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment (4.8% compared to 4.8%, a difference of 0.75%), female unemployment (4.8% compared to 4.7%, a difference of 0.96%), and unemployment among ages 45 to 54 years (4.2% compared to 4.3%, a difference of 1.6%).
Zimbabwean vs Lithuanian Unemployment
Unemployment MetricZimbabweanLithuanian
Unemployment
Exceptional
4.8%
Exceptional
4.8%
Males
Exceptional
4.8%
Exceptional
5.0%
Females
Exceptional
4.8%
Exceptional
4.7%
Youth < 25
Exceptional
10.2%
Exceptional
11.3%
Age | 16 to 19 years
Exceptional
15.4%
Exceptional
16.7%
Age | 20 to 24 years
Exceptional
9.2%
Good
10.2%
Age | 25 to 29 years
Exceptional
6.4%
Good
6.5%
Age | 30 to 34 years
Exceptional
4.8%
Good
5.4%
Age | 35 to 44 years
Exceptional
4.3%
Exceptional
4.4%
Age | 45 to 54 years
Exceptional
4.2%
Exceptional
4.3%
Age | 55 to 59 years
Exceptional
4.2%
Excellent
4.7%
Age | 60 to 64 years
Exceptional
4.5%
Excellent
4.8%
Age | 65 to 74 years
Tragic
5.9%
Fair
5.4%
Seniors > 65
Tragic
5.6%
Average
5.1%
Seniors > 75
Average
8.7%
Tragic
9.9%
Women w/ Children < 6
Exceptional
7.3%
Fair
7.8%
Women w/ Children 6 to 17
Exceptional
8.6%
Tragic
9.4%
Women w/ Children < 18
Exceptional
5.1%
Exceptional
5.0%

Zimbabwean vs Lithuanian Labor Participation

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Zimbabwean and Lithuanian communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (38.7% compared to 40.4%, a difference of 4.4%), in labor force | age > 16 (67.3% compared to 64.8%, a difference of 3.8%), and in labor force | age 20-24 (75.6% compared to 77.0%, a difference of 1.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 30-34 (85.6% compared to 85.6%, a difference of 0.070%), in labor force | age 45-54 (84.0% compared to 83.6%, a difference of 0.50%), and in labor force | age 20-64 (81.0% compared to 80.2%, a difference of 0.88%).
Zimbabwean vs Lithuanian Labor Participation
Labor Participation MetricZimbabweanLithuanian
In Labor Force | Age > 16
Exceptional
67.3%
Poor
64.8%
In Labor Force | Age 20-64
Exceptional
81.0%
Exceptional
80.2%
In Labor Force | Age 16-19
Exceptional
38.7%
Exceptional
40.4%
In Labor Force | Age 20-24
Excellent
75.6%
Exceptional
77.0%
In Labor Force | Age 25-29
Fair
84.5%
Exceptional
85.8%
In Labor Force | Age 30-34
Exceptional
85.6%
Exceptional
85.6%
In Labor Force | Age 35-44
Exceptional
86.1%
Exceptional
85.2%
In Labor Force | Age 45-54
Exceptional
84.0%
Exceptional
83.6%

Zimbabwean vs Lithuanian Family Structure

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Zimbabwean and Lithuanian communities in the United States are seen in single mother households (6.1% compared to 5.4%, a difference of 11.6%), family households with children (27.9% compared to 26.6%, a difference of 5.0%), and single father households (2.2% compared to 2.1%, a difference of 4.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of family households (64.1% compared to 64.0%, a difference of 0.020%), divorced or separated (11.6% compared to 11.7%, a difference of 1.4%), and births to unmarried women (28.7% compared to 29.6%, a difference of 3.0%).
Zimbabwean vs Lithuanian Family Structure
Family Structure MetricZimbabweanLithuanian
Family Households
Fair
64.1%
Fair
64.0%
Family Households with Children
Exceptional
27.9%
Tragic
26.6%
Married-couple Households
Excellent
47.4%
Exceptional
48.9%
Average Family Size
Poor
3.20
Tragic
3.10
Single Father Households
Exceptional
2.2%
Exceptional
2.1%
Single Mother Households
Excellent
6.1%
Exceptional
5.4%
Currently Married
Good
47.0%
Exceptional
49.0%
Divorced or Separated
Exceptional
11.6%
Exceptional
11.7%
Births to Unmarried Women
Exceptional
28.7%
Exceptional
29.6%

Zimbabwean vs Lithuanian Vehicle Availability

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Zimbabwean and Lithuanian communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (9.0% compared to 8.4%, a difference of 7.2%), 4 or more vehicles in household (6.4% compared to 6.3%, a difference of 1.8%), and 2 or more vehicles in household (57.2% compared to 58.2%, a difference of 1.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 3 or more vehicles in household (20.3% compared to 20.1%, a difference of 0.68%), 1 or more vehicles in household (91.0% compared to 91.7%, a difference of 0.76%), and 2 or more vehicles in household (57.2% compared to 58.2%, a difference of 1.7%).
Zimbabwean vs Lithuanian Vehicle Availability
Vehicle Availability MetricZimbabweanLithuanian
No Vehicles Available
Exceptional
9.0%
Exceptional
8.4%
1+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
91.0%
Exceptional
91.7%
2+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
57.2%
Exceptional
58.2%
3+ Vehicles Available
Excellent
20.3%
Excellent
20.1%
4+ Vehicles Available
Good
6.4%
Average
6.3%

Zimbabwean vs Lithuanian Education Level

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Zimbabwean and Lithuanian communities in the United States are seen in no schooling completed (1.7% compared to 1.4%, a difference of 20.3%), professional degree (5.2% compared to 5.4%, a difference of 3.5%), and bachelor's degree (43.3% compared to 42.2%, a difference of 2.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of master's degree (17.7% compared to 17.7%, a difference of 0.11%), nursery school (98.3% compared to 98.6%, a difference of 0.33%), and kindergarten (98.3% compared to 98.6%, a difference of 0.33%).
Zimbabwean vs Lithuanian Education Level
Education Level MetricZimbabweanLithuanian
No Schooling Completed
Exceptional
1.7%
Exceptional
1.4%
Nursery School
Exceptional
98.3%
Exceptional
98.6%
Kindergarten
Exceptional
98.3%
Exceptional
98.6%
1st Grade
Exceptional
98.3%
Exceptional
98.6%
2nd Grade
Exceptional
98.2%
Exceptional
98.5%
3rd Grade
Exceptional
98.1%
Exceptional
98.5%
4th Grade
Exceptional
97.9%
Exceptional
98.3%
5th Grade
Exceptional
97.8%
Exceptional
98.2%
6th Grade
Exceptional
97.6%
Exceptional
98.1%
7th Grade
Exceptional
96.8%
Exceptional
97.5%
8th Grade
Exceptional
96.5%
Exceptional
97.3%
9th Grade
Exceptional
95.9%
Exceptional
96.6%
10th Grade
Exceptional
94.9%
Exceptional
95.8%
11th Grade
Exceptional
93.9%
Exceptional
94.8%
12th Grade, No Diploma
Exceptional
92.7%
Exceptional
93.6%
High School Diploma
Exceptional
91.1%
Exceptional
92.0%
GED/Equivalency
Exceptional
88.0%
Exceptional
88.9%
College, Under 1 year
Exceptional
69.9%
Exceptional
68.8%
College, 1 year or more
Exceptional
64.2%
Exceptional
62.9%
Associate's Degree
Exceptional
51.3%
Exceptional
50.6%
Bachelor's Degree
Exceptional
43.3%
Exceptional
42.2%
Master's Degree
Exceptional
17.7%
Exceptional
17.7%
Professional Degree
Exceptional
5.2%
Exceptional
5.4%
Doctorate Degree
Exceptional
2.3%
Exceptional
2.3%

Zimbabwean vs Lithuanian Disability

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Zimbabwean and Lithuanian communities in the United States are seen in disability age under 5 (1.2% compared to 1.6%, a difference of 32.7%), hearing disability (2.8% compared to 3.4%, a difference of 17.9%), and ambulatory disability (5.4% compared to 6.0%, a difference of 11.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of disability age 65 to 74 (21.5% compared to 21.4%, a difference of 0.76%), disability age 35 to 64 (10.4% compared to 10.8%, a difference of 3.4%), and vision disability (2.0% compared to 2.0%, a difference of 3.9%).
Zimbabwean vs Lithuanian Disability
Disability MetricZimbabweanLithuanian
Disability
Exceptional
10.9%
Poor
11.9%
Males
Exceptional
10.6%
Tragic
11.6%
Females
Exceptional
11.3%
Average
12.2%
Age | Under 5 years
Exceptional
1.2%
Tragic
1.6%
Age | 5 to 17 years
Good
5.5%
Tragic
5.8%
Age | 18 to 34 years
Good
6.5%
Tragic
7.0%
Age | 35 to 64 years
Exceptional
10.4%
Excellent
10.8%
Age | 65 to 74 years
Exceptional
21.5%
Exceptional
21.4%
Age | Over 75 years
Tragic
48.1%
Exceptional
45.1%
Vision
Exceptional
2.0%
Exceptional
2.0%
Hearing
Excellent
2.8%
Tragic
3.4%
Cognitive
Tragic
17.6%
Exceptional
16.3%
Ambulatory
Exceptional
5.4%
Excellent
6.0%
Self-Care
Exceptional
2.2%
Exceptional
2.4%