Immigrants from Hong Kong vs Cherokee Community Comparison

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 236,002,292 people shows a weak positive correlation between the proportion of Cherokee within Immigrant from Hong Kong communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.289. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Immigrants from Hong Kong within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.080% in Cherokee. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Immigrants from Hong Kong corresponds to an increase of 80.4 Cherokee.

When considering income, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Hong Kong and Cherokee communities in the United States are seen in householder income ages 25 - 44 years ($128,140 compared to $80,843, a difference of 58.5%), median household income ($111,519 compared to $72,682, a difference of 53.4%), and per capita income ($56,709 compared to $37,203, a difference of 52.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of wage/income gap (25.5% compared to 27.4%, a difference of 7.4%), householder income under 25 years ($62,083 compared to $47,848, a difference of 29.7%), and householder income over 65 years ($71,567 compared to $54,133, a difference of 32.2%).

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Hong Kong and Cherokee communities in the United States are seen in child poverty under the age of 5 (12.4% compared to 21.7%, a difference of 74.6%), female poverty among 25-34 year olds (10.4% compared to 17.2%, a difference of 65.6%), and child poverty among girls under 16 (12.3% compared to 19.9%, a difference of 61.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of seniors poverty over the age of 65 (11.1% compared to 11.0%, a difference of 1.0%), seniors poverty over the age of 75 (12.8% compared to 12.0%, a difference of 6.8%), and married-couple family poverty (4.7% compared to 5.8%, a difference of 22.1%).

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Hong Kong and Cherokee communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among women with children under 6 years (5.8% compared to 9.3%, a difference of 61.2%), unemployment among women with children ages 6 to 17 years (7.2% compared to 10.0%, a difference of 39.6%), and unemployment among seniors over 75 years (7.6% compared to 9.8%, a difference of 28.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among seniors over 65 years (5.1% compared to 5.1%, a difference of 0.36%), unemployment among ages 55 to 59 years (5.0% compared to 5.0%, a difference of 0.61%), and unemployment among ages 20 to 24 years (10.5% compared to 10.5%, a difference of 0.66%).

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Hong Kong and Cherokee communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (30.5% compared to 40.2%, a difference of 32.1%), in labor force | age > 16 (65.7% compared to 61.9%, a difference of 6.1%), and in labor force | age 20-24 (71.6% compared to 75.9%, a difference of 6.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 25-29 (85.0% compared to 82.1%, a difference of 3.6%), in labor force | age 35-44 (85.2% compared to 81.4%, a difference of 4.7%), and in labor force | age 30-34 (85.8% compared to 81.6%, a difference of 5.1%).

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Hong Kong and Cherokee communities in the United States are seen in births to unmarried women (23.6% compared to 36.7%, a difference of 55.5%), single father households (1.8% compared to 2.6%, a difference of 43.2%), and single mother households (4.8% compared to 6.8%, a difference of 41.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of family households with children (27.5% compared to 27.5%, a difference of 0.19%), family households (66.1% compared to 65.0%, a difference of 1.8%), and average family size (3.26 compared to 3.18, a difference of 2.3%).

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Hong Kong and Cherokee communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (11.3% compared to 7.7%, a difference of 46.1%), 3 or more vehicles in household (19.2% compared to 23.0%, a difference of 20.0%), and 4 or more vehicles in household (6.5% compared to 7.7%, a difference of 19.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (88.7% compared to 92.4%, a difference of 4.1%), 2 or more vehicles in household (52.6% compared to 59.9%, a difference of 13.9%), and 4 or more vehicles in household (6.5% compared to 7.7%, a difference of 19.5%).

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Hong Kong and Cherokee communities in the United States are seen in professional degree (6.4% compared to 3.3%, a difference of 94.6%), doctorate degree (2.8% compared to 1.5%, a difference of 90.9%), and master's degree (20.5% compared to 11.4%, a difference of 80.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 11th grade (92.2% compared to 92.4%, a difference of 0.20%), high school diploma (89.3% compared to 88.5%, a difference of 0.81%), and 12th grade, no diploma (91.3% compared to 90.5%, a difference of 0.96%).

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Hong Kong and Cherokee communities in the United States are seen in disability age 35 to 64 (8.2% compared to 15.5%, a difference of 88.5%), disability age under 5 (0.95% compared to 1.8%, a difference of 87.1%), and disability age 18 to 34 (5.2% compared to 8.7%, a difference of 67.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of disability age over 75 (46.5% compared to 50.2%, a difference of 8.1%), cognitive disability (16.0% compared to 18.0%, a difference of 12.2%), and self-care disability (2.4% compared to 2.9%, a difference of 20.4%).