Chickasaw vs French Canadian Community Comparison

COMPARE

Chickasaw
Race
Ancestry
AfghanAfricanAlaska NativeAlaskan AthabascanAlbanianAleutAlsatianAmericanApacheArabArapahoArgentineanArmenianAssyrian/Chaldean/SyriacAustralianAustrianBahamianBangladeshiBarbadianBasqueBelgianBelizeanBermudanBhutaneseBlackfeetBolivianBrazilianBritishBritish West IndianBulgarianBurmeseCajunCambodianCanadianCape VerdeanCarpatho RusynCelticCentral AmericanCentral American IndianCherokeeCheyenneChickasawChileanChineseChippewaChoctawColombianColvilleComancheCosta RicanCreeCreekCroatianCrowCubanCypriotCzechCzechoslovakianDanishDelawareDominicanDutchDutch West IndianEastern EuropeanEcuadorianEgyptianEnglishEstonianEthiopianEuropeanFijianFilipinoFinnishFrenchFrench American IndianGermanGerman 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 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
French Canadian
Race
Ancestry
AfghanAfricanAlaska NativeAlaskan AthabascanAlbanianAleutAlsatianAmericanApacheArabArapahoArgentineanArmenianAssyrian/Chaldean/SyriacAustralianAustrianBahamianBangladeshiBarbadianBasqueBelgianBelizeanBermudanBhutaneseBlackfeetBolivianBrazilianBritishBritish West IndianBulgarianBurmeseCajunCambodianCanadianCape VerdeanCarpatho RusynCelticCentral AmericanCentral American IndianCherokeeCheyenneChileanChineseChippewaChoctawColombianColvilleComancheCosta 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 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
Social Comparison
Social Comparison
Income
Poverty
Unemployment
Labor Participation
Family Structure
Vehicle Availability
Education Level
Disability

Social Comparison

Chickasaw

French Canadians

Fair
Average
3,663
SOCIAL INDEX
34.2/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
212th/ 347
SOCIAL RANK
5,542
SOCIAL INDEX
52.9/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
175th/ 347
SOCIAL RANK

French Canadian Integration in Chickasaw Communities

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 142,496,675 people shows a slight positive correlation between the proportion of French Canadians within Chickasaw communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.091. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Chickasaw within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.021% in French Canadians. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Chickasaw corresponds to an increase of 20.5 French Canadians.
Chickasaw Integration in French Canadian Communities

Chickasaw vs French Canadian Income

When considering income, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and French Canadian communities in the United States are seen in householder income ages 45 - 64 years ($82,193 compared to $99,093, a difference of 20.6%), householder income ages 25 - 44 years ($77,929 compared to $93,694, a difference of 20.2%), and median family income ($85,356 compared to $101,634, a difference of 19.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of wage/income gap (27.2% compared to 28.1%, a difference of 3.3%), householder income over 65 years ($53,732 compared to $57,975, a difference of 7.9%), and median female earnings ($34,414 compared to $38,436, a difference of 11.7%).
Chickasaw vs French Canadian Income
Income MetricChickasawFrench Canadian
Per Capita Income
Tragic
$36,475
Fair
$43,003
Median Family Income
Tragic
$85,356
Fair
$101,634
Median Household Income
Tragic
$70,005
Poor
$82,810
Median Earnings
Tragic
$40,672
Fair
$46,026
Median Male Earnings
Tragic
$47,832
Average
$54,722
Median Female Earnings
Tragic
$34,414
Tragic
$38,436
Householder Age | Under 25 years
Tragic
$44,763
Good
$52,672
Householder Age | 25 - 44 years
Tragic
$77,929
Fair
$93,694
Householder Age | 45 - 64 years
Tragic
$82,193
Fair
$99,093
Householder Age | Over 65 years
Tragic
$53,732
Tragic
$57,975
Wage/Income Gap
Tragic
27.2%
Tragic
28.1%

Chickasaw vs French Canadian Poverty

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and French Canadian communities in the United States are seen in married-couple family poverty (5.8% compared to 4.2%, a difference of 36.3%), family poverty (10.8% compared to 8.1%, a difference of 33.3%), and male poverty (13.5% compared to 10.5%, a difference of 28.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of seniors poverty over the age of 75 (11.6% compared to 11.4%, a difference of 1.9%), single father poverty (19.0% compared to 18.6%, a difference of 2.1%), and seniors poverty over the age of 65 (10.7% compared to 9.8%, a difference of 8.6%).
Chickasaw vs French Canadian Poverty
Poverty MetricChickasawFrench Canadian
Poverty
Tragic
14.7%
Exceptional
11.6%
Families
Tragic
10.8%
Exceptional
8.1%
Males
Tragic
13.5%
Exceptional
10.5%
Females
Tragic
15.9%
Exceptional
12.7%
Females 18 to 24 years
Tragic
24.5%
Good
19.9%
Females 25 to 34 years
Tragic
17.0%
Tragic
14.3%
Children Under 5 years
Tragic
21.8%
Fair
17.7%
Children Under 16 years
Tragic
19.5%
Good
15.6%
Boys Under 16 years
Tragic
19.8%
Good
15.9%
Girls Under 16 years
Tragic
19.6%
Good
16.1%
Single Males
Tragic
16.3%
Tragic
14.6%
Single Females
Tragic
26.3%
Tragic
22.2%
Single Fathers
Tragic
19.0%
Tragic
18.6%
Single Mothers
Tragic
34.4%
Tragic
30.8%
Married Couples
Tragic
5.8%
Exceptional
4.2%
Seniors Over 65 years
Good
10.7%
Exceptional
9.8%
Seniors Over 75 years
Exceptional
11.6%
Exceptional
11.4%
Receiving Food Stamps
Tragic
13.1%
Good
11.4%

Chickasaw vs French Canadian Unemployment

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and French Canadian communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among seniors over 75 years (7.3% compared to 11.2%, a difference of 52.2%), unemployment among seniors over 65 years (4.4% compared to 5.4%, a difference of 21.5%), and unemployment among ages 65 to 74 years (4.7% compared to 5.6%, a difference of 19.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among youth under 25 years (11.2% compared to 11.2%, a difference of 0.62%), male unemployment (5.2% compared to 5.1%, a difference of 0.71%), and unemployment among ages 55 to 59 years (4.8% compared to 4.8%, a difference of 0.79%).
Chickasaw vs French Canadian Unemployment
Unemployment MetricChickasawFrench Canadian
Unemployment
Exceptional
5.0%
Exceptional
4.9%
Males
Excellent
5.2%
Excellent
5.1%
Females
Excellent
5.1%
Exceptional
4.8%
Youth < 25
Exceptional
11.2%
Exceptional
11.2%
Age | 16 to 19 years
Exceptional
16.7%
Exceptional
16.8%
Age | 20 to 24 years
Exceptional
9.9%
Good
10.2%
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%
Poor
4.8%
Age | 45 to 54 years
Exceptional
4.2%
Exceptional
4.4%
Age | 55 to 59 years
Good
4.8%
Excellent
4.8%
Age | 60 to 64 years
Exceptional
4.3%
Excellent
4.8%
Age | 65 to 74 years
Exceptional
4.7%
Tragic
5.6%
Seniors > 65
Exceptional
4.4%
Tragic
5.4%
Seniors > 75
Exceptional
7.3%
Tragic
11.2%
Women w/ Children < 6
Tragic
9.0%
Tragic
8.4%
Women w/ Children 6 to 17
Exceptional
8.6%
Tragic
10.3%
Women w/ Children < 18
Good
5.4%
Excellent
5.2%

Chickasaw vs French Canadian Labor Participation

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and French Canadian communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (38.3% compared to 43.6%, a difference of 13.7%), in labor force | age 20-24 (74.5% compared to 78.1%, a difference of 4.9%), and in labor force | age 45-54 (79.0% compared to 82.5%, a difference of 4.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age > 16 (62.3% compared to 64.0%, a difference of 2.8%), in labor force | age 30-34 (81.9% compared to 84.8%, a difference of 3.5%), and in labor force | age 20-64 (76.2% compared to 79.2%, a difference of 3.9%).
Chickasaw vs French Canadian Labor Participation
Labor Participation MetricChickasawFrench Canadian
In Labor Force | Age > 16
Tragic
62.3%
Tragic
64.0%
In Labor Force | Age 20-64
Tragic
76.2%
Tragic
79.2%
In Labor Force | Age 16-19
Exceptional
38.3%
Exceptional
43.6%
In Labor Force | Age 20-24
Poor
74.5%
Exceptional
78.1%
In Labor Force | Age 25-29
Tragic
81.9%
Exceptional
85.2%
In Labor Force | Age 30-34
Tragic
81.9%
Good
84.8%
In Labor Force | Age 35-44
Tragic
80.9%
Average
84.3%
In Labor Force | Age 45-54
Tragic
79.0%
Poor
82.5%

Chickasaw vs French Canadian Family Structure

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and French Canadian communities in the United States are seen in single mother households (7.0% compared to 6.0%, a difference of 16.6%), single father households (2.8% compared to 2.4%, a difference of 15.3%), and divorced or separated (14.2% compared to 12.8%, a difference of 10.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of family households (64.4% compared to 63.7%, a difference of 1.1%), currently married (46.6% compared to 48.0%, a difference of 3.1%), and married-couple households (45.9% compared to 47.5%, a difference of 3.5%).
Chickasaw vs French Canadian Family Structure
Family Structure MetricChickasawFrench Canadian
Family Households
Good
64.4%
Tragic
63.7%
Family Households with Children
Exceptional
28.2%
Tragic
26.1%
Married-couple Households
Fair
45.9%
Exceptional
47.5%
Average Family Size
Tragic
3.19
Tragic
3.07
Single Father Households
Tragic
2.8%
Fair
2.4%
Single Mother Households
Tragic
7.0%
Excellent
6.0%
Currently Married
Average
46.6%
Exceptional
48.0%
Divorced or Separated
Tragic
14.2%
Tragic
12.8%
Births to Unmarried Women
Tragic
36.3%
Tragic
34.4%

Chickasaw vs French Canadian Vehicle Availability

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and French Canadian communities in the United States are seen in 4 or more vehicles in household (7.4% compared to 6.6%, a difference of 12.5%), 3 or more vehicles in household (22.2% compared to 20.6%, a difference of 7.9%), and 2 or more vehicles in household (59.0% compared to 58.9%, a difference of 0.24%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (92.3% compared to 92.3%, a difference of 0.040%), no vehicles in household (7.9% compared to 7.8%, a difference of 0.21%), and 2 or more vehicles in household (59.0% compared to 58.9%, a difference of 0.24%).
Chickasaw vs French Canadian Vehicle Availability
Vehicle Availability MetricChickasawFrench Canadian
No Vehicles Available
Exceptional
7.9%
Exceptional
7.8%
1+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
92.3%
Exceptional
92.3%
2+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
59.0%
Exceptional
58.9%
3+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
22.2%
Exceptional
20.6%
4+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
7.4%
Excellent
6.6%

Chickasaw vs French Canadian Education Level

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and French Canadian communities in the United States are seen in master's degree (11.4% compared to 14.1%, a difference of 23.3%), professional degree (3.4% compared to 4.0%, a difference of 19.4%), and doctorate degree (1.5% compared to 1.8%, a difference of 18.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of kindergarten (98.4% compared to 98.6%, a difference of 0.20%), 1st grade (98.3% compared to 98.5%, a difference of 0.20%), and nursery school (98.4% compared to 98.6%, a difference of 0.21%).
Chickasaw vs French Canadian Education Level
Education Level MetricChickasawFrench Canadian
No Schooling Completed
Exceptional
1.7%
Exceptional
1.5%
Nursery School
Exceptional
98.4%
Exceptional
98.6%
Kindergarten
Exceptional
98.4%
Exceptional
98.6%
1st Grade
Exceptional
98.3%
Exceptional
98.5%
2nd Grade
Exceptional
98.3%
Exceptional
98.5%
3rd Grade
Exceptional
98.2%
Exceptional
98.4%
4th Grade
Exceptional
98.0%
Exceptional
98.3%
5th Grade
Exceptional
97.9%
Exceptional
98.2%
6th Grade
Exceptional
97.6%
Exceptional
98.0%
7th Grade
Exceptional
96.7%
Exceptional
97.4%
8th Grade
Exceptional
96.4%
Exceptional
97.2%
9th Grade
Exceptional
95.5%
Exceptional
96.3%
10th Grade
Excellent
94.1%
Exceptional
95.3%
11th Grade
Fair
92.3%
Exceptional
94.0%
12th Grade, No Diploma
Tragic
90.3%
Exceptional
92.6%
High School Diploma
Poor
88.4%
Exceptional
90.9%
GED/Equivalency
Tragic
83.8%
Exceptional
86.9%
College, Under 1 year
Tragic
60.4%
Poor
64.2%
College, 1 year or more
Tragic
53.3%
Poor
57.8%
Associate's Degree
Tragic
38.6%
Poor
44.9%
Bachelor's Degree
Tragic
30.4%
Tragic
35.6%
Master's Degree
Tragic
11.4%
Poor
14.1%
Professional Degree
Tragic
3.4%
Tragic
4.0%
Doctorate Degree
Tragic
1.5%
Fair
1.8%

Chickasaw vs French Canadian Disability

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and French Canadian communities in the United States are seen in vision disability (3.2% compared to 2.3%, a difference of 39.7%), disability age 65 to 74 (30.2% compared to 23.7%, a difference of 27.3%), and disability age 35 to 64 (16.1% compared to 12.9%, a difference of 24.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of disability age 5 to 17 (6.8% compared to 6.7%, a difference of 1.9%), disability age under 5 (1.7% compared to 1.9%, a difference of 8.0%), and cognitive disability (18.5% compared to 17.1%, a difference of 8.4%).
Chickasaw vs French Canadian Disability
Disability MetricChickasawFrench Canadian
Disability
Tragic
15.2%
Tragic
13.4%
Males
Tragic
15.1%
Tragic
13.3%
Females
Tragic
15.2%
Tragic
13.6%
Age | Under 5 years
Tragic
1.7%
Tragic
1.9%
Age | 5 to 17 years
Tragic
6.8%
Tragic
6.7%
Age | 18 to 34 years
Tragic
9.0%
Tragic
8.1%
Age | 35 to 64 years
Tragic
16.1%
Tragic
12.9%
Age | 65 to 74 years
Tragic
30.2%
Fair
23.7%
Age | Over 75 years
Tragic
51.2%
Good
47.0%
Vision
Tragic
3.2%
Tragic
2.3%
Hearing
Tragic
4.5%
Tragic
3.8%
Cognitive
Tragic
18.5%
Excellent
17.1%
Ambulatory
Tragic
8.0%
Tragic
6.7%
Self-Care
Tragic
2.9%
Tragic
2.6%