Bermudan vs Chickasaw Community Comparison
COMPARE
Bermudan
Chickasaw
Social Comparison
Social Comparison
Bermudans
Chickasaw
2,838
SOCIAL INDEX
25.9/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
241st/ 347
SOCIAL RANK
3,663
SOCIAL INDEX
34.2/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
212th/ 347
SOCIAL RANK
Chickasaw Integration in Bermudan Communities
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 37,298,252 people shows a significant positive correlation between the proportion of Chickasaw within Bermudan communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.663. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Bermudans within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.883% in Chickasaw. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Bermudans corresponds to an increase of 882.9 Chickasaw.
Bermudan vs Chickasaw Income
When considering income, the most significant differences between Bermudan and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in per capita income ($42,911 compared to $36,475, a difference of 17.6%), wage/income gap (23.1% compared to 27.2%, a difference of 17.5%), and median household income ($80,406 compared to $70,005, a difference of 14.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of householder income under 25 years ($47,359 compared to $44,763, a difference of 5.8%), householder income over 65 years ($58,171 compared to $53,732, a difference of 8.3%), and median male earnings ($52,465 compared to $47,832, a difference of 9.7%).
Income Metric | Bermudan | Chickasaw |
Per Capita Income | Fair $42,911 | Tragic $36,475 |
Median Family Income | Tragic $97,577 | Tragic $85,356 |
Median Household Income | Tragic $80,406 | Tragic $70,005 |
Median Earnings | Fair $45,593 | Tragic $40,672 |
Median Male Earnings | Poor $52,465 | Tragic $47,832 |
Median Female Earnings | Fair $39,418 | Tragic $34,414 |
Householder Age | Under 25 years | Tragic $47,359 | Tragic $44,763 |
Householder Age | 25 - 44 years | Tragic $88,231 | Tragic $77,929 |
Householder Age | 45 - 64 years | Tragic $94,197 | Tragic $82,193 |
Householder Age | Over 65 years | Tragic $58,171 | Tragic $53,732 |
Wage/Income Gap | Exceptional 23.1% | Tragic 27.2% |
Bermudan vs Chickasaw Poverty
When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Bermudan and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in female poverty among 25-34 year olds (13.6% compared to 17.0%, a difference of 25.4%), single male poverty (13.1% compared to 16.3%, a difference of 24.4%), and single female poverty (22.3% compared to 26.3%, a difference of 17.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of receiving food stamps (13.0% compared to 13.1%, a difference of 0.99%), child poverty among girls under 16 (18.1% compared to 19.6%, a difference of 8.2%), and child poverty under the age of 16 (18.0% compared to 19.5%, a difference of 8.4%).
Poverty Metric | Bermudan | Chickasaw |
Poverty | Tragic 13.3% | Tragic 14.7% |
Families | Tragic 9.9% | Tragic 10.8% |
Males | Tragic 12.2% | Tragic 13.5% |
Females | Tragic 14.4% | Tragic 15.9% |
Females 18 to 24 years | Tragic 21.9% | Tragic 24.5% |
Females 25 to 34 years | Average 13.6% | Tragic 17.0% |
Children Under 5 years | Tragic 19.2% | Tragic 21.8% |
Children Under 16 years | Tragic 18.0% | Tragic 19.5% |
Boys Under 16 years | Tragic 18.1% | Tragic 19.8% |
Girls Under 16 years | Tragic 18.1% | Tragic 19.6% |
Single Males | Poor 13.1% | Tragic 16.3% |
Single Females | Tragic 22.3% | Tragic 26.3% |
Single Fathers | Tragic 16.9% | Tragic 19.0% |
Single Mothers | Tragic 30.6% | Tragic 34.4% |
Married Couples | Average 5.2% | Tragic 5.8% |
Seniors Over 65 years | Tragic 11.9% | Good 10.7% |
Seniors Over 75 years | Tragic 12.9% | Exceptional 11.6% |
Receiving Food Stamps | Tragic 13.0% | Tragic 13.1% |
Bermudan vs Chickasaw Unemployment
When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Bermudan and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among seniors over 65 years (5.9% compared to 4.4%, a difference of 33.6%), unemployment among ages 65 to 74 years (6.3% compared to 4.7%, a difference of 33.1%), and unemployment among ages 20 to 24 years (12.5% compared to 9.9%, a difference of 25.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among ages 35 to 44 years (5.0% compared to 4.9%, a difference of 0.67%), unemployment among ages 55 to 59 years (4.9% compared to 4.8%, a difference of 2.8%), and unemployment among women with children under 6 years (8.7% compared to 9.0%, a difference of 3.4%).
Unemployment Metric | Bermudan | Chickasaw |
Unemployment | Tragic 5.6% | Exceptional 5.0% |
Males | Tragic 5.9% | Excellent 5.2% |
Females | Tragic 5.4% | Excellent 5.1% |
Youth < 25 | Tragic 13.0% | Exceptional 11.2% |
Age | 16 to 19 years | Average 17.6% | Exceptional 16.7% |
Age | 20 to 24 years | Tragic 12.5% | Exceptional 9.9% |
Age | 25 to 29 years | Tragic 7.0% | Fair 6.7% |
Age | 30 to 34 years | Tragic 5.8% | Tragic 6.2% |
Age | 35 to 44 years | Tragic 5.0% | Tragic 4.9% |
Age | 45 to 54 years | Tragic 5.0% | Exceptional 4.2% |
Age | 55 to 59 years | Poor 4.9% | Good 4.8% |
Age | 60 to 64 years | Average 4.9% | Exceptional 4.3% |
Age | 65 to 74 years | Tragic 6.3% | Exceptional 4.7% |
Seniors > 65 | Tragic 5.9% | Exceptional 4.4% |
Seniors > 75 | Poor 8.9% | Exceptional 7.3% |
Women w/ Children < 6 | Tragic 8.7% | Tragic 9.0% |
Women w/ Children 6 to 17 | Tragic 10.5% | Exceptional 8.6% |
Women w/ Children < 18 | Tragic 6.1% | Good 5.4% |
Bermudan vs Chickasaw Labor Participation
When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Bermudan and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age > 16 (66.0% compared to 62.3%, a difference of 6.0%), in labor force | age 35-44 (85.3% compared to 80.9%, a difference of 5.4%), and in labor force | age 45-54 (83.1% compared to 79.0%, a difference of 5.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 20-24 (74.1% compared to 74.5%, a difference of 0.46%), in labor force | age 16-19 (36.9% compared to 38.3%, a difference of 3.7%), and in labor force | age 30-34 (85.9% compared to 81.9%, a difference of 4.9%).
Labor Participation Metric | Bermudan | Chickasaw |
In Labor Force | Age > 16 | Exceptional 66.0% | Tragic 62.3% |
In Labor Force | Age 20-64 | Exceptional 80.0% | Tragic 76.2% |
In Labor Force | Age 16-19 | Good 36.9% | Exceptional 38.3% |
In Labor Force | Age 20-24 | Tragic 74.1% | Poor 74.5% |
In Labor Force | Age 25-29 | Exceptional 86.0% | Tragic 81.9% |
In Labor Force | Age 30-34 | Exceptional 85.9% | Tragic 81.9% |
In Labor Force | Age 35-44 | Exceptional 85.3% | Tragic 80.9% |
In Labor Force | Age 45-54 | Excellent 83.1% | Tragic 79.0% |
Bermudan vs Chickasaw Family Structure
When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Bermudan and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in single father households (2.1% compared to 2.8%, a difference of 29.3%), divorced or separated (12.7% compared to 14.2%, a difference of 12.1%), and married-couple households (42.4% compared to 45.9%, a difference of 8.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of average family size (3.20 compared to 3.19, a difference of 0.30%), births to unmarried women (35.5% compared to 36.3%, a difference of 2.1%), and single mother households (7.3% compared to 7.0%, a difference of 3.4%).
Family Structure Metric | Bermudan | Chickasaw |
Family Households | Tragic 62.2% | Good 64.4% |
Family Households with Children | Tragic 26.3% | Exceptional 28.2% |
Married-couple Households | Tragic 42.4% | Fair 45.9% |
Average Family Size | Poor 3.20 | Tragic 3.19 |
Single Father Households | Exceptional 2.1% | Tragic 2.8% |
Single Mother Households | Tragic 7.3% | Tragic 7.0% |
Currently Married | Tragic 43.5% | Average 46.6% |
Divorced or Separated | Tragic 12.7% | Tragic 14.2% |
Births to Unmarried Women | Tragic 35.5% | Tragic 36.3% |
Bermudan vs Chickasaw Vehicle Availability
When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Bermudan and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (12.8% compared to 7.9%, a difference of 62.7%), 4 or more vehicles in household (5.6% compared to 7.4%, a difference of 32.4%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (17.8% compared to 22.2%, a difference of 25.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (87.5% compared to 92.3%, a difference of 5.4%), 2 or more vehicles in household (50.6% compared to 59.0%, a difference of 16.6%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (17.8% compared to 22.2%, a difference of 25.0%).
Vehicle Availability Metric | Bermudan | Chickasaw |
No Vehicles Available | Tragic 12.8% | Exceptional 7.9% |
1+ Vehicles Available | Tragic 87.5% | Exceptional 92.3% |
2+ Vehicles Available | Tragic 50.6% | Exceptional 59.0% |
3+ Vehicles Available | Tragic 17.8% | Exceptional 22.2% |
4+ Vehicles Available | Tragic 5.6% | Exceptional 7.4% |
Bermudan vs Chickasaw Education Level
When considering education level, the most significant differences between Bermudan and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in master's degree (15.4% compared to 11.4%, a difference of 35.0%), professional degree (4.4% compared to 3.4%, a difference of 29.8%), and no schooling completed (2.1% compared to 1.7%, a difference of 26.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 10th grade (93.9% compared to 94.1%, a difference of 0.15%), 11th grade (92.6% compared to 92.3%, a difference of 0.32%), and nursery school (98.0% compared to 98.4%, a difference of 0.40%).
Education Level Metric | Bermudan | Chickasaw |
No Schooling Completed | Fair 2.1% | Exceptional 1.7% |
Nursery School | Average 98.0% | Exceptional 98.4% |
Kindergarten | Average 98.0% | Exceptional 98.4% |
1st Grade | Average 97.9% | Exceptional 98.3% |
2nd Grade | Average 97.9% | Exceptional 98.3% |
3rd Grade | Good 97.8% | Exceptional 98.2% |
4th Grade | Good 97.6% | Exceptional 98.0% |
5th Grade | Average 97.4% | Exceptional 97.9% |
6th Grade | Average 97.1% | Exceptional 97.6% |
7th Grade | Good 96.1% | Exceptional 96.7% |
8th Grade | Good 95.8% | Exceptional 96.4% |
9th Grade | Good 95.0% | Exceptional 95.5% |
10th Grade | Good 93.9% | Excellent 94.1% |
11th Grade | Good 92.6% | Fair 92.3% |
12th Grade, No Diploma | Average 91.2% | Tragic 90.3% |
High School Diploma | Good 89.3% | Poor 88.4% |
GED/Equivalency | Average 85.8% | Tragic 83.8% |
College, Under 1 year | Average 65.2% | Tragic 60.4% |
College, 1 year or more | Average 59.3% | Tragic 53.3% |
Associate's Degree | Average 46.2% | Tragic 38.6% |
Bachelor's Degree | Average 38.0% | Tragic 30.4% |
Master's Degree | Good 15.4% | Tragic 11.4% |
Professional Degree | Average 4.4% | Tragic 3.4% |
Doctorate Degree | Average 1.8% | Tragic 1.5% |
Bermudan vs Chickasaw Disability
When considering disability, the most significant differences between Bermudan and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in hearing disability (2.9% compared to 4.5%, a difference of 55.4%), vision disability (2.2% compared to 3.2%, a difference of 41.6%), and disability age 35 to 64 (11.9% compared to 16.1%, a difference of 35.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of cognitive disability (18.1% compared to 18.5%, a difference of 2.0%), disability age 5 to 17 (6.4% compared to 6.8%, a difference of 7.6%), and disability age over 75 (46.9% compared to 51.2%, a difference of 9.2%).
Disability Metric | Bermudan | Chickasaw |
Disability | Tragic 12.3% | Tragic 15.2% |
Males | Tragic 11.8% | Tragic 15.1% |
Females | Tragic 12.7% | Tragic 15.2% |
Age | Under 5 years | Tragic 1.4% | Tragic 1.7% |
Age | 5 to 17 years | Tragic 6.4% | Tragic 6.8% |
Age | 18 to 34 years | Tragic 7.3% | Tragic 9.0% |
Age | 35 to 64 years | Tragic 11.9% | Tragic 16.1% |
Age | 65 to 74 years | Tragic 24.2% | Tragic 30.2% |
Age | Over 75 years | Excellent 46.9% | Tragic 51.2% |
Vision | Tragic 2.2% | Tragic 3.2% |
Hearing | Excellent 2.9% | Tragic 4.5% |
Cognitive | Tragic 18.1% | Tragic 18.5% |
Ambulatory | Tragic 6.5% | Tragic 8.0% |
Self-Care | Tragic 2.6% | Tragic 2.9% |