Chickasaw vs Bermudan Community Comparison
COMPARE
Chickasaw
Bermudan
Social Comparison
Social Comparison
Chickasaw
Bermudans
3,663
SOCIAL INDEX
34.2/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
212th/ 347
SOCIAL RANK
2,838
SOCIAL INDEX
25.9/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
241st/ 347
SOCIAL RANK
Bermudan Integration in Chickasaw Communities
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 37,298,252 people shows a strong positive correlation between the proportion of Bermudans within Chickasaw communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.730. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Chickasaw within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.171% in Bermudans. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Chickasaw corresponds to an increase of 170.8 Bermudans.
Chickasaw vs Bermudan Income
When considering income, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Bermudan communities in the United States are seen in per capita income ($36,475 compared to $42,911, a difference of 17.6%), wage/income gap (27.2% compared to 23.1%, a difference of 17.5%), and median household income ($70,005 compared to $80,406, a difference of 14.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of householder income under 25 years ($44,763 compared to $47,359, a difference of 5.8%), householder income over 65 years ($53,732 compared to $58,171, a difference of 8.3%), and median male earnings ($47,832 compared to $52,465, a difference of 9.7%).
Income Metric | Chickasaw | Bermudan |
Per Capita Income | Tragic $36,475 | Fair $42,911 |
Median Family Income | Tragic $85,356 | Tragic $97,577 |
Median Household Income | Tragic $70,005 | Tragic $80,406 |
Median Earnings | Tragic $40,672 | Fair $45,593 |
Median Male Earnings | Tragic $47,832 | Poor $52,465 |
Median Female Earnings | Tragic $34,414 | Fair $39,418 |
Householder Age | Under 25 years | Tragic $44,763 | Tragic $47,359 |
Householder Age | 25 - 44 years | Tragic $77,929 | Tragic $88,231 |
Householder Age | 45 - 64 years | Tragic $82,193 | Tragic $94,197 |
Householder Age | Over 65 years | Tragic $53,732 | Tragic $58,171 |
Wage/Income Gap | Tragic 27.2% | Exceptional 23.1% |
Chickasaw vs Bermudan Poverty
When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Bermudan communities in the United States are seen in female poverty among 25-34 year olds (17.0% compared to 13.6%, a difference of 25.4%), single male poverty (16.3% compared to 13.1%, a difference of 24.4%), and single female poverty (26.3% compared to 22.3%, a difference of 17.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of receiving food stamps (13.1% compared to 13.0%, a difference of 0.99%), child poverty among girls under 16 (19.6% compared to 18.1%, a difference of 8.2%), and child poverty under the age of 16 (19.5% compared to 18.0%, a difference of 8.4%).
Poverty Metric | Chickasaw | Bermudan |
Poverty | Tragic 14.7% | Tragic 13.3% |
Families | Tragic 10.8% | Tragic 9.9% |
Males | Tragic 13.5% | Tragic 12.2% |
Females | Tragic 15.9% | Tragic 14.4% |
Females 18 to 24 years | Tragic 24.5% | Tragic 21.9% |
Females 25 to 34 years | Tragic 17.0% | Average 13.6% |
Children Under 5 years | Tragic 21.8% | Tragic 19.2% |
Children Under 16 years | Tragic 19.5% | Tragic 18.0% |
Boys Under 16 years | Tragic 19.8% | Tragic 18.1% |
Girls Under 16 years | Tragic 19.6% | Tragic 18.1% |
Single Males | Tragic 16.3% | Poor 13.1% |
Single Females | Tragic 26.3% | Tragic 22.3% |
Single Fathers | Tragic 19.0% | Tragic 16.9% |
Single Mothers | Tragic 34.4% | Tragic 30.6% |
Married Couples | Tragic 5.8% | Average 5.2% |
Seniors Over 65 years | Good 10.7% | Tragic 11.9% |
Seniors Over 75 years | Exceptional 11.6% | Tragic 12.9% |
Receiving Food Stamps | Tragic 13.1% | Tragic 13.0% |
Chickasaw vs Bermudan Unemployment
When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Bermudan communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among seniors over 65 years (4.4% compared to 5.9%, a difference of 33.6%), unemployment among ages 65 to 74 years (4.7% compared to 6.3%, a difference of 33.1%), and unemployment among ages 20 to 24 years (9.9% compared to 12.5%, a difference of 25.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among ages 35 to 44 years (4.9% compared to 5.0%, a difference of 0.67%), unemployment among ages 55 to 59 years (4.8% compared to 4.9%, a difference of 2.8%), and unemployment among women with children under 6 years (9.0% compared to 8.7%, a difference of 3.4%).
Unemployment Metric | Chickasaw | Bermudan |
Unemployment | Exceptional 5.0% | Tragic 5.6% |
Males | Excellent 5.2% | Tragic 5.9% |
Females | Excellent 5.1% | Tragic 5.4% |
Youth < 25 | Exceptional 11.2% | Tragic 13.0% |
Age | 16 to 19 years | Exceptional 16.7% | Average 17.6% |
Age | 20 to 24 years | Exceptional 9.9% | Tragic 12.5% |
Age | 25 to 29 years | Fair 6.7% | Tragic 7.0% |
Age | 30 to 34 years | Tragic 6.2% | Tragic 5.8% |
Age | 35 to 44 years | Tragic 4.9% | Tragic 5.0% |
Age | 45 to 54 years | Exceptional 4.2% | Tragic 5.0% |
Age | 55 to 59 years | Good 4.8% | Poor 4.9% |
Age | 60 to 64 years | Exceptional 4.3% | Average 4.9% |
Age | 65 to 74 years | Exceptional 4.7% | Tragic 6.3% |
Seniors > 65 | Exceptional 4.4% | Tragic 5.9% |
Seniors > 75 | Exceptional 7.3% | Poor 8.9% |
Women w/ Children < 6 | Tragic 9.0% | Tragic 8.7% |
Women w/ Children 6 to 17 | Exceptional 8.6% | Tragic 10.5% |
Women w/ Children < 18 | Good 5.4% | Tragic 6.1% |
Chickasaw vs Bermudan Labor Participation
When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Bermudan communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age > 16 (62.3% compared to 66.0%, a difference of 6.0%), in labor force | age 35-44 (80.9% compared to 85.3%, a difference of 5.4%), and in labor force | age 45-54 (79.0% compared to 83.1%, a difference of 5.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 20-24 (74.5% compared to 74.1%, a difference of 0.46%), in labor force | age 16-19 (38.3% compared to 36.9%, a difference of 3.7%), and in labor force | age 30-34 (81.9% compared to 85.9%, a difference of 4.9%).
Labor Participation Metric | Chickasaw | Bermudan |
In Labor Force | Age > 16 | Tragic 62.3% | Exceptional 66.0% |
In Labor Force | Age 20-64 | Tragic 76.2% | Exceptional 80.0% |
In Labor Force | Age 16-19 | Exceptional 38.3% | Good 36.9% |
In Labor Force | Age 20-24 | Poor 74.5% | Tragic 74.1% |
In Labor Force | Age 25-29 | Tragic 81.9% | Exceptional 86.0% |
In Labor Force | Age 30-34 | Tragic 81.9% | Exceptional 85.9% |
In Labor Force | Age 35-44 | Tragic 80.9% | Exceptional 85.3% |
In Labor Force | Age 45-54 | Tragic 79.0% | Excellent 83.1% |
Chickasaw vs Bermudan Family Structure
When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Bermudan communities in the United States are seen in single father households (2.8% compared to 2.1%, a difference of 29.3%), divorced or separated (14.2% compared to 12.7%, a difference of 12.1%), and married-couple households (45.9% compared to 42.4%, a difference of 8.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of average family size (3.19 compared to 3.20, a difference of 0.30%), births to unmarried women (36.3% compared to 35.5%, a difference of 2.1%), and single mother households (7.0% compared to 7.3%, a difference of 3.4%).
Family Structure Metric | Chickasaw | Bermudan |
Family Households | Good 64.4% | Tragic 62.2% |
Family Households with Children | Exceptional 28.2% | Tragic 26.3% |
Married-couple Households | Fair 45.9% | Tragic 42.4% |
Average Family Size | Tragic 3.19 | Poor 3.20 |
Single Father Households | Tragic 2.8% | Exceptional 2.1% |
Single Mother Households | Tragic 7.0% | Tragic 7.3% |
Currently Married | Average 46.6% | Tragic 43.5% |
Divorced or Separated | Tragic 14.2% | Tragic 12.7% |
Births to Unmarried Women | Tragic 36.3% | Tragic 35.5% |
Chickasaw vs Bermudan Vehicle Availability
When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Bermudan communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (7.9% compared to 12.8%, a difference of 62.7%), 4 or more vehicles in household (7.4% compared to 5.6%, a difference of 32.4%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (22.2% compared to 17.8%, a difference of 25.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (92.3% compared to 87.5%, a difference of 5.4%), 2 or more vehicles in household (59.0% compared to 50.6%, a difference of 16.6%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (22.2% compared to 17.8%, a difference of 25.0%).
Vehicle Availability Metric | Chickasaw | Bermudan |
No Vehicles Available | Exceptional 7.9% | Tragic 12.8% |
1+ Vehicles Available | Exceptional 92.3% | Tragic 87.5% |
2+ Vehicles Available | Exceptional 59.0% | Tragic 50.6% |
3+ Vehicles Available | Exceptional 22.2% | Tragic 17.8% |
4+ Vehicles Available | Exceptional 7.4% | Tragic 5.6% |
Chickasaw vs Bermudan Education Level
When considering education level, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Bermudan communities in the United States are seen in master's degree (11.4% compared to 15.4%, a difference of 35.0%), professional degree (3.4% compared to 4.4%, a difference of 29.8%), and no schooling completed (1.7% compared to 2.1%, a difference of 26.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 10th grade (94.1% compared to 93.9%, a difference of 0.15%), 11th grade (92.3% compared to 92.6%, a difference of 0.32%), and nursery school (98.4% compared to 98.0%, a difference of 0.40%).
Education Level Metric | Chickasaw | Bermudan |
No Schooling Completed | Exceptional 1.7% | Fair 2.1% |
Nursery School | Exceptional 98.4% | Average 98.0% |
Kindergarten | Exceptional 98.4% | Average 98.0% |
1st Grade | Exceptional 98.3% | Average 97.9% |
2nd Grade | Exceptional 98.3% | Average 97.9% |
3rd Grade | Exceptional 98.2% | Good 97.8% |
4th Grade | Exceptional 98.0% | Good 97.6% |
5th Grade | Exceptional 97.9% | Average 97.4% |
6th Grade | Exceptional 97.6% | Average 97.1% |
7th Grade | Exceptional 96.7% | Good 96.1% |
8th Grade | Exceptional 96.4% | Good 95.8% |
9th Grade | Exceptional 95.5% | Good 95.0% |
10th Grade | Excellent 94.1% | Good 93.9% |
11th Grade | Fair 92.3% | Good 92.6% |
12th Grade, No Diploma | Tragic 90.3% | Average 91.2% |
High School Diploma | Poor 88.4% | Good 89.3% |
GED/Equivalency | Tragic 83.8% | Average 85.8% |
College, Under 1 year | Tragic 60.4% | Average 65.2% |
College, 1 year or more | Tragic 53.3% | Average 59.3% |
Associate's Degree | Tragic 38.6% | Average 46.2% |
Bachelor's Degree | Tragic 30.4% | Average 38.0% |
Master's Degree | Tragic 11.4% | Good 15.4% |
Professional Degree | Tragic 3.4% | Average 4.4% |
Doctorate Degree | Tragic 1.5% | Average 1.8% |
Chickasaw vs Bermudan Disability
When considering disability, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Bermudan communities in the United States are seen in hearing disability (4.5% compared to 2.9%, a difference of 55.4%), vision disability (3.2% compared to 2.2%, a difference of 41.6%), and disability age 35 to 64 (16.1% compared to 11.9%, a difference of 35.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of cognitive disability (18.5% compared to 18.1%, a difference of 2.0%), disability age 5 to 17 (6.8% compared to 6.4%, a difference of 7.6%), and disability age over 75 (51.2% compared to 46.9%, a difference of 9.2%).
Disability Metric | Chickasaw | Bermudan |
Disability | Tragic 15.2% | Tragic 12.3% |
Males | Tragic 15.1% | Tragic 11.8% |
Females | Tragic 15.2% | Tragic 12.7% |
Age | Under 5 years | Tragic 1.7% | Tragic 1.4% |
Age | 5 to 17 years | Tragic 6.8% | Tragic 6.4% |
Age | 18 to 34 years | Tragic 9.0% | Tragic 7.3% |
Age | 35 to 64 years | Tragic 16.1% | Tragic 11.9% |
Age | 65 to 74 years | Tragic 30.2% | Tragic 24.2% |
Age | Over 75 years | Tragic 51.2% | Excellent 46.9% |
Vision | Tragic 3.2% | Tragic 2.2% |
Hearing | Tragic 4.5% | Excellent 2.9% |
Cognitive | Tragic 18.5% | Tragic 18.1% |
Ambulatory | Tragic 8.0% | Tragic 6.5% |
Self-Care | Tragic 2.9% | Tragic 2.6% |