Chickasaw vs Comanche Community Comparison

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 74,682,296 people shows a poor positive correlation between the proportion of Comanche within Chickasaw communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.100. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Chickasaw within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.012% in Comanche. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Chickasaw corresponds to an increase of 12.3 Comanche.

When considering income, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Comanche communities in the United States are seen in wage/income gap (27.2% compared to 25.0%, a difference of 8.5%), householder income under 25 years ($44,763 compared to $47,518, a difference of 6.2%), and householder income ages 25 - 44 years ($77,929 compared to $82,152, a difference of 5.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of median male earnings ($47,832 compared to $48,202, a difference of 0.77%), median earnings ($40,672 compared to $41,519, a difference of 2.1%), and householder income over 65 years ($53,732 compared to $54,922, a difference of 2.2%).

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Comanche communities in the United States are seen in seniors poverty over the age of 65 (10.7% compared to 12.1%, a difference of 12.9%), seniors poverty over the age of 75 (11.6% compared to 12.8%, a difference of 10.2%), and child poverty under the age of 5 (21.8% compared to 21.0%, a difference of 3.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of receiving food stamps (13.1% compared to 13.3%, a difference of 1.3%), child poverty among boys under 16 (19.8% compared to 20.1%, a difference of 1.4%), and single mother poverty (34.4% compared to 33.9%, a difference of 1.5%).

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Comanche communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among ages 16 to 19 years (16.7% compared to 20.2%, a difference of 21.5%), unemployment among ages 60 to 64 years (4.3% compared to 5.0%, a difference of 16.6%), and unemployment among ages 25 to 29 years (6.7% compared to 7.8%, a difference of 16.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among ages 65 to 74 years (4.7% compared to 4.7%, a difference of 0.26%), unemployment among ages 30 to 34 years (6.2% compared to 6.3%, a difference of 1.1%), and unemployment among ages 20 to 24 years (9.9% compared to 10.2%, a difference of 2.4%).

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Comanche communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age > 16 (62.3% compared to 63.6%, a difference of 2.1%), in labor force | age 16-19 (38.3% compared to 37.7%, a difference of 1.7%), and in labor force | age 20-24 (74.5% compared to 75.4%, a difference of 1.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 25-29 (81.9% compared to 81.9%, a difference of 0.010%), in labor force | age 45-54 (79.0% compared to 79.2%, a difference of 0.17%), and in labor force | age 35-44 (80.9% compared to 81.5%, a difference of 0.69%).

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Comanche communities in the United States are seen in single father households (2.8% compared to 2.5%, a difference of 8.6%), divorced or separated (14.2% compared to 13.5%, a difference of 5.0%), and currently married (46.6% compared to 45.0%, a difference of 3.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of single mother households (7.0% compared to 7.0%, a difference of 0.19%), births to unmarried women (36.3% compared to 36.7%, a difference of 1.2%), and family households (64.4% compared to 63.5%, a difference of 1.5%).

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Comanche communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (7.9% compared to 10.2%, a difference of 30.4%), 4 or more vehicles in household (7.4% compared to 6.8%, a difference of 9.5%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (22.2% compared to 21.0%, a difference of 5.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (92.3% compared to 89.9%, a difference of 2.6%), 2 or more vehicles in household (59.0% compared to 56.5%, a difference of 4.5%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (22.2% compared to 21.0%, a difference of 5.9%).

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Comanche communities in the United States are seen in no schooling completed (1.7% compared to 2.1%, a difference of 21.6%), master's degree (11.4% compared to 12.1%, a difference of 5.9%), and professional degree (3.4% compared to 3.5%, a difference of 5.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of ged/equivalency (83.8% compared to 83.6%, a difference of 0.28%), nursery school (98.4% compared to 98.0%, a difference of 0.36%), and kindergarten (98.4% compared to 98.0%, a difference of 0.37%).

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Comanche communities in the United States are seen in disability age under 5 (1.7% compared to 1.2%, a difference of 40.0%), hearing disability (4.5% compared to 4.0%, a difference of 13.0%), and vision disability (3.2% compared to 2.8%, a difference of 11.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of self-care disability (2.9% compared to 2.9%, a difference of 0.47%), cognitive disability (18.5% compared to 18.6%, a difference of 0.67%), and disability age over 75 (51.2% compared to 51.7%, a difference of 1.0%).