Immigrants from Hong Kong vs Chinese Community Comparison

COMPARE

Immigrants from Hong Kong
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 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 SalvadorEnglandEritreaEthiopiaEuropeFijiFranceGermanyGhanaGreeceGrenadaGuatemalaGuyanaHaitiHondurasHungaryIndiaIndonesiaIranIraqIrelandIsraelItalyJamaicaJapanJordanKazakhstanKenyaKoreaKuwaitLaosLatin 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

Immigrants from Hong Kong

Chinese

Good
Exceptional
7,848
SOCIAL INDEX
76.0/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
102nd/ 347
SOCIAL RANK
9,296
SOCIAL INDEX
90.4/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
23rd/ 347
SOCIAL RANK

Chinese Integration in Immigrants from Hong Kong Communities

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 56,108,979 people shows a slight positive correlation between the proportion of Chinese within Immigrant from Hong Kong communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.051. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Immigrants from Hong Kong within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.017% in Chinese. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Immigrants from Hong Kong corresponds to an increase of 16.6 Chinese.
Immigrants from Hong Kong Integration in Chinese Communities

Immigrants from Hong Kong vs Chinese Income

When considering income, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Hong Kong and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in median male earnings ($70,146 compared to $56,872, a difference of 23.3%), per capita income ($56,709 compared to $46,098, a difference of 23.0%), and householder income ages 25 - 44 years ($128,140 compared to $104,264, a difference of 22.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of wage/income gap (25.5% compared to 25.9%, a difference of 1.5%), householder income under 25 years ($62,083 compared to $58,162, a difference of 6.7%), and householder income over 65 years ($71,567 compared to $77,465, a difference of 8.2%).
Immigrants from Hong Kong vs Chinese Income
Income MetricImmigrants from Hong KongChinese
Per Capita Income
Exceptional
$56,709
Exceptional
$46,098
Median Family Income
Exceptional
$131,067
Exceptional
$116,188
Median Household Income
Exceptional
$111,519
Exceptional
$98,496
Median Earnings
Exceptional
$59,433
Exceptional
$48,836
Median Male Earnings
Exceptional
$70,146
Exceptional
$56,872
Median Female Earnings
Exceptional
$49,818
Exceptional
$41,461
Householder Age | Under 25 years
Exceptional
$62,083
Exceptional
$58,162
Householder Age | 25 - 44 years
Exceptional
$128,140
Exceptional
$104,264
Householder Age | 45 - 64 years
Exceptional
$127,500
Exceptional
$116,156
Householder Age | Over 65 years
Exceptional
$71,567
Exceptional
$77,465
Wage/Income Gap
Good
25.5%
Average
25.9%

Immigrants from Hong Kong vs Chinese Poverty

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Hong Kong and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in seniors poverty over the age of 75 (12.8% compared to 9.1%, a difference of 41.7%), seniors poverty over the age of 65 (11.1% compared to 8.3%, a difference of 32.8%), and married-couple family poverty (4.7% compared to 3.6%, a difference of 29.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of child poverty among girls under 16 (12.3% compared to 12.3%, a difference of 0.13%), single mother poverty (24.4% compared to 24.6%, a difference of 1.0%), and child poverty under the age of 16 (12.1% compared to 11.9%, a difference of 1.8%).
Immigrants from Hong Kong vs Chinese Poverty
Poverty MetricImmigrants from Hong KongChinese
Poverty
Exceptional
10.4%
Exceptional
9.5%
Families
Exceptional
7.3%
Exceptional
6.5%
Males
Exceptional
9.6%
Exceptional
8.7%
Females
Exceptional
11.2%
Exceptional
10.4%
Females 18 to 24 years
Exceptional
17.5%
Exceptional
16.2%
Females 25 to 34 years
Exceptional
10.4%
Exceptional
11.0%
Children Under 5 years
Exceptional
12.4%
Exceptional
13.1%
Children Under 16 years
Exceptional
12.1%
Exceptional
11.9%
Boys Under 16 years
Exceptional
12.3%
Exceptional
11.9%
Girls Under 16 years
Exceptional
12.3%
Exceptional
12.3%
Single Males
Exceptional
10.4%
Exceptional
11.0%
Single Females
Exceptional
16.5%
Exceptional
16.1%
Single Fathers
Exceptional
14.2%
Exceptional
15.4%
Single Mothers
Exceptional
24.4%
Exceptional
24.6%
Married Couples
Exceptional
4.7%
Exceptional
3.6%
Seniors Over 65 years
Fair
11.1%
Exceptional
8.3%
Seniors Over 75 years
Tragic
12.8%
Exceptional
9.1%
Receiving Food Stamps
Exceptional
9.1%
Exceptional
9.8%

Immigrants from Hong Kong vs Chinese Unemployment

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Hong Kong and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among ages 60 to 64 years (5.2% compared to 4.0%, a difference of 29.6%), unemployment among seniors over 75 years (7.6% compared to 5.9%, a difference of 29.4%), and unemployment among women with children ages 6 to 17 years (7.2% compared to 9.3%, a difference of 28.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among ages 30 to 34 years (5.0% compared to 5.1%, a difference of 1.3%), unemployment among ages 35 to 44 years (4.4% compared to 4.3%, a difference of 2.3%), and unemployment among ages 25 to 29 years (6.3% compared to 6.1%, a difference of 3.1%).
Immigrants from Hong Kong vs Chinese Unemployment
Unemployment MetricImmigrants from Hong KongChinese
Unemployment
Good
5.2%
Exceptional
4.7%
Males
Good
5.2%
Exceptional
4.9%
Females
Excellent
5.1%
Exceptional
4.5%
Youth < 25
Average
11.6%
Exceptional
10.7%
Age | 16 to 19 years
Good
17.4%
Exceptional
16.0%
Age | 20 to 24 years
Poor
10.5%
Exceptional
9.4%
Age | 25 to 29 years
Exceptional
6.3%
Exceptional
6.1%
Age | 30 to 34 years
Exceptional
5.0%
Exceptional
5.1%
Age | 35 to 44 years
Exceptional
4.4%
Exceptional
4.3%
Age | 45 to 54 years
Average
4.5%
Exceptional
4.0%
Age | 55 to 59 years
Tragic
5.0%
Exceptional
4.4%
Age | 60 to 64 years
Tragic
5.2%
Exceptional
4.0%
Age | 65 to 74 years
Excellent
5.3%
Exceptional
4.4%
Seniors > 65
Good
5.1%
Exceptional
4.2%
Seniors > 75
Exceptional
7.6%
Exceptional
5.9%
Women w/ Children < 6
Exceptional
5.8%
Exceptional
6.8%
Women w/ Children 6 to 17
Exceptional
7.2%
Tragic
9.3%
Women w/ Children < 18
Exceptional
4.7%
Exceptional
4.9%

Immigrants from Hong Kong vs Chinese Labor Participation

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Hong Kong and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (30.5% compared to 38.6%, a difference of 26.7%), in labor force | age 20-24 (71.6% compared to 77.3%, a difference of 7.9%), and in labor force | age > 16 (65.7% compared to 64.7%, a difference of 1.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 35-44 (85.2% compared to 85.1%, a difference of 0.14%), in labor force | age 20-64 (80.4% compared to 80.7%, a difference of 0.32%), and in labor force | age 45-54 (83.6% compared to 84.1%, a difference of 0.62%).
Immigrants from Hong Kong vs Chinese Labor Participation
Labor Participation MetricImmigrants from Hong KongChinese
In Labor Force | Age > 16
Exceptional
65.7%
Tragic
64.7%
In Labor Force | Age 20-64
Exceptional
80.4%
Exceptional
80.7%
In Labor Force | Age 16-19
Tragic
30.5%
Exceptional
38.6%
In Labor Force | Age 20-24
Tragic
71.6%
Exceptional
77.3%
In Labor Force | Age 25-29
Exceptional
85.0%
Poor
84.3%
In Labor Force | Age 30-34
Exceptional
85.8%
Excellent
85.0%
In Labor Force | Age 35-44
Exceptional
85.2%
Exceptional
85.1%
In Labor Force | Age 45-54
Exceptional
83.6%
Exceptional
84.1%

Immigrants from Hong Kong vs Chinese Family Structure

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Hong Kong and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in births to unmarried women (23.6% compared to 30.2%, a difference of 28.3%), divorced or separated (10.0% compared to 11.2%, a difference of 12.2%), and single father households (1.8% compared to 2.0%, a difference of 7.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of currently married (48.9% compared to 49.5%, a difference of 1.3%), married-couple households (49.6% compared to 50.4%, a difference of 1.4%), and average family size (3.26 compared to 3.34, a difference of 2.5%).
Immigrants from Hong Kong vs Chinese Family Structure
Family Structure MetricImmigrants from Hong KongChinese
Family Households
Exceptional
66.1%
Exceptional
68.1%
Family Households with Children
Good
27.5%
Tragic
26.0%
Married-couple Households
Exceptional
49.6%
Exceptional
50.4%
Average Family Size
Excellent
3.26
Exceptional
3.34
Single Father Households
Exceptional
1.8%
Exceptional
2.0%
Single Mother Households
Exceptional
4.8%
Exceptional
5.2%
Currently Married
Exceptional
48.9%
Exceptional
49.5%
Divorced or Separated
Exceptional
10.0%
Exceptional
11.2%
Births to Unmarried Women
Exceptional
23.6%
Excellent
30.2%

Immigrants from Hong Kong vs Chinese Vehicle Availability

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Hong Kong and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (11.3% compared to 8.2%, a difference of 37.5%), 4 or more vehicles in household (6.5% compared to 8.8%, a difference of 36.6%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (19.2% compared to 23.9%, a difference of 24.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (88.7% compared to 91.9%, a difference of 3.5%), 2 or more vehicles in household (52.6% compared to 60.1%, a difference of 14.3%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (19.2% compared to 23.9%, a difference of 24.6%).
Immigrants from Hong Kong vs Chinese Vehicle Availability
Vehicle Availability MetricImmigrants from Hong KongChinese
No Vehicles Available
Tragic
11.3%
Exceptional
8.2%
1+ Vehicles Available
Tragic
88.7%
Exceptional
91.9%
2+ Vehicles Available
Tragic
52.6%
Exceptional
60.1%
3+ Vehicles Available
Fair
19.2%
Exceptional
23.9%
4+ Vehicles Available
Good
6.5%
Exceptional
8.8%

Immigrants from Hong Kong vs Chinese Education Level

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Hong Kong and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in no schooling completed (2.7% compared to 1.5%, a difference of 83.5%), doctorate degree (2.8% compared to 1.8%, a difference of 57.2%), and professional degree (6.4% compared to 4.5%, a difference of 43.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of nursery school (97.4% compared to 98.6%, a difference of 1.2%), kindergarten (97.3% compared to 98.5%, a difference of 1.3%), and 1st grade (97.3% compared to 98.5%, a difference of 1.3%).
Immigrants from Hong Kong vs Chinese Education Level
Education Level MetricImmigrants from Hong KongChinese
No Schooling Completed
Tragic
2.7%
Exceptional
1.5%
Nursery School
Tragic
97.4%
Exceptional
98.6%
Kindergarten
Tragic
97.3%
Exceptional
98.5%
1st Grade
Tragic
97.3%
Exceptional
98.5%
2nd Grade
Tragic
97.2%
Exceptional
98.5%
3rd Grade
Tragic
97.1%
Exceptional
98.4%
4th Grade
Tragic
96.9%
Exceptional
98.3%
5th Grade
Tragic
96.7%
Exceptional
98.1%
6th Grade
Tragic
96.3%
Exceptional
97.9%
7th Grade
Tragic
95.2%
Exceptional
97.1%
8th Grade
Tragic
94.9%
Exceptional
96.9%
9th Grade
Tragic
94.1%
Exceptional
96.3%
10th Grade
Tragic
93.1%
Exceptional
95.5%
11th Grade
Fair
92.2%
Exceptional
94.6%
12th Grade, No Diploma
Good
91.3%
Exceptional
93.6%
High School Diploma
Average
89.3%
Exceptional
92.0%
GED/Equivalency
Exceptional
86.9%
Exceptional
89.0%
College, Under 1 year
Exceptional
71.0%
Exceptional
68.3%
College, 1 year or more
Exceptional
66.4%
Exceptional
62.2%
Associate's Degree
Exceptional
55.4%
Exceptional
48.5%
Bachelor's Degree
Exceptional
48.2%
Good
38.5%
Master's Degree
Exceptional
20.5%
Fair
14.6%
Professional Degree
Exceptional
6.4%
Average
4.5%
Doctorate Degree
Exceptional
2.8%
Fair
1.8%

Immigrants from Hong Kong vs Chinese Disability

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Hong Kong and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in hearing disability (2.7% compared to 3.7%, a difference of 38.3%), male disability (9.4% compared to 12.1%, a difference of 28.0%), and disability age 35 to 64 (8.2% compared to 10.3%, a difference of 25.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of cognitive disability (16.0% compared to 15.9%, a difference of 0.59%), disability age over 75 (46.5% compared to 48.7%, a difference of 4.9%), and self-care disability (2.4% compared to 2.6%, a difference of 7.5%).
Immigrants from Hong Kong vs Chinese Disability
Disability MetricImmigrants from Hong KongChinese
Disability
Exceptional
10.0%
Tragic
12.2%
Males
Exceptional
9.4%
Tragic
12.1%
Females
Exceptional
10.6%
Fair
12.3%
Age | Under 5 years
Exceptional
0.95%
Exceptional
1.1%
Age | 5 to 17 years
Exceptional
4.3%
Exceptional
4.7%
Age | 18 to 34 years
Exceptional
5.2%
Exceptional
6.3%
Age | 35 to 64 years
Exceptional
8.2%
Exceptional
10.3%
Age | 65 to 74 years
Exceptional
19.9%
Exceptional
21.7%
Age | Over 75 years
Exceptional
46.5%
Tragic
48.7%
Vision
Exceptional
1.8%
Exceptional
2.0%
Hearing
Exceptional
2.7%
Tragic
3.7%
Cognitive
Exceptional
16.0%
Exceptional
15.9%
Ambulatory
Exceptional
5.3%
Tragic
6.5%
Self-Care
Exceptional
2.4%
Tragic
2.6%