Chickasaw vs Pakistani Community Comparison

COMPARE

Chickasaw
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 EuropeanNorwegianOkinawanOsageOttawaPaiutePalestinianPanamanianParaguayanPennsylvania 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
Pakistani
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

Pakistanis

Fair
Good
3,663
SOCIAL INDEX
34.2/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
212th/ 347
SOCIAL RANK
8,084
SOCIAL INDEX
78.3/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
88th/ 347
SOCIAL RANK

Pakistani Integration in Chickasaw Communities

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 125,289,013 people shows a moderate positive correlation between the proportion of Pakistanis within Chickasaw communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.424. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Chickasaw within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.029% in Pakistanis. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Chickasaw corresponds to an increase of 29.3 Pakistanis.
Chickasaw Integration in Pakistani Communities

Chickasaw vs Pakistani Income

When considering income, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Pakistani communities in the United States are seen in householder income ages 45 - 64 years ($82,193 compared to $105,317, a difference of 28.1%), median household income ($70,005 compared to $89,638, a difference of 28.0%), and householder income ages 25 - 44 years ($77,929 compared to $98,401, a difference of 26.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of wage/income gap (27.2% compared to 26.1%, a difference of 4.3%), median female earnings ($34,414 compared to $40,596, a difference of 18.0%), and median male earnings ($47,832 compared to $56,719, a difference of 18.6%).
Chickasaw vs Pakistani Income
Income MetricChickasawPakistani
Per Capita Income
Tragic
$36,475
Excellent
$45,587
Median Family Income
Tragic
$85,356
Exceptional
$107,390
Median Household Income
Tragic
$70,005
Exceptional
$89,638
Median Earnings
Tragic
$40,672
Exceptional
$48,254
Median Male Earnings
Tragic
$47,832
Excellent
$56,719
Median Female Earnings
Tragic
$34,414
Excellent
$40,596
Householder Age | Under 25 years
Tragic
$44,763
Exceptional
$53,325
Householder Age | 25 - 44 years
Tragic
$77,929
Excellent
$98,401
Householder Age | 45 - 64 years
Tragic
$82,193
Exceptional
$105,317
Householder Age | Over 65 years
Tragic
$53,732
Exceptional
$63,844
Wage/Income Gap
Tragic
27.2%
Fair
26.1%

Chickasaw vs Pakistani Poverty

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Pakistani communities in the United States are seen in child poverty under the age of 5 (21.8% compared to 16.0%, a difference of 36.5%), single male poverty (16.3% compared to 12.4%, a difference of 31.8%), and female poverty among 25-34 year olds (17.0% compared to 13.0%, a difference of 31.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of seniors poverty over the age of 75 (11.6% compared to 11.8%, a difference of 1.2%), seniors poverty over the age of 65 (10.7% compared to 10.3%, a difference of 3.4%), and single father poverty (19.0% compared to 15.7%, a difference of 20.5%).
Chickasaw vs Pakistani Poverty
Poverty MetricChickasawPakistani
Poverty
Tragic
14.7%
Excellent
11.9%
Families
Tragic
10.8%
Exceptional
8.3%
Males
Tragic
13.5%
Excellent
10.8%
Females
Tragic
15.9%
Excellent
12.9%
Females 18 to 24 years
Tragic
24.5%
Good
19.8%
Females 25 to 34 years
Tragic
17.0%
Excellent
13.0%
Children Under 5 years
Tragic
21.8%
Exceptional
16.0%
Children Under 16 years
Tragic
19.5%
Exceptional
15.0%
Boys Under 16 years
Tragic
19.8%
Exceptional
15.1%
Girls Under 16 years
Tragic
19.6%
Exceptional
15.3%
Single Males
Tragic
16.3%
Exceptional
12.4%
Single Females
Tragic
26.3%
Exceptional
20.2%
Single Fathers
Tragic
19.0%
Exceptional
15.7%
Single Mothers
Tragic
34.4%
Exceptional
28.0%
Married Couples
Tragic
5.8%
Exceptional
4.7%
Seniors Over 65 years
Good
10.7%
Exceptional
10.3%
Seniors Over 75 years
Exceptional
11.6%
Excellent
11.8%
Receiving Food Stamps
Tragic
13.1%
Exceptional
10.4%

Chickasaw vs Pakistani Unemployment

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Pakistani communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among women with children under 6 years (9.0% compared to 7.3%, a difference of 22.2%), unemployment among seniors over 75 years (7.3% compared to 8.9%, a difference of 20.8%), and unemployment among seniors over 65 years (4.4% compared to 5.1%, a difference of 15.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of female unemployment (5.1% compared to 5.1%, a difference of 0.060%), male unemployment (5.2% compared to 5.2%, a difference of 0.24%), and unemployment among youth under 25 years (11.2% compared to 11.3%, a difference of 1.1%).
Chickasaw vs Pakistani Unemployment
Unemployment MetricChickasawPakistani
Unemployment
Exceptional
5.0%
Excellent
5.1%
Males
Excellent
5.2%
Excellent
5.2%
Females
Excellent
5.1%
Excellent
5.1%
Youth < 25
Exceptional
11.2%
Exceptional
11.3%
Age | 16 to 19 years
Exceptional
16.7%
Excellent
17.2%
Age | 20 to 24 years
Exceptional
9.9%
Exceptional
9.8%
Age | 25 to 29 years
Fair
6.7%
Excellent
6.5%
Age | 30 to 34 years
Tragic
6.2%
Good
5.4%
Age | 35 to 44 years
Tragic
4.9%
Good
4.6%
Age | 45 to 54 years
Exceptional
4.2%
Exceptional
4.4%
Age | 55 to 59 years
Good
4.8%
Excellent
4.7%
Age | 60 to 64 years
Exceptional
4.3%
Good
4.8%
Age | 65 to 74 years
Exceptional
4.7%
Excellent
5.3%
Seniors > 65
Exceptional
4.4%
Good
5.1%
Seniors > 75
Exceptional
7.3%
Fair
8.9%
Women w/ Children < 6
Tragic
9.0%
Exceptional
7.3%
Women w/ Children 6 to 17
Exceptional
8.6%
Exceptional
8.4%
Women w/ Children < 18
Good
5.4%
Excellent
5.2%

Chickasaw vs Pakistani Labor Participation

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Pakistani communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age > 16 (62.3% compared to 65.8%, a difference of 5.6%), in labor force | age 45-54 (79.0% compared to 82.8%, a difference of 4.7%), and in labor force | age 20-64 (76.2% compared to 79.8%, a difference of 4.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 20-24 (74.5% compared to 75.8%, a difference of 1.8%), in labor force | age 16-19 (38.3% compared to 37.6%, a difference of 2.1%), and in labor force | age 30-34 (81.9% compared to 84.7%, a difference of 3.5%).
Chickasaw vs Pakistani Labor Participation
Labor Participation MetricChickasawPakistani
In Labor Force | Age > 16
Tragic
62.3%
Exceptional
65.8%
In Labor Force | Age 20-64
Tragic
76.2%
Good
79.8%
In Labor Force | Age 16-19
Exceptional
38.3%
Excellent
37.6%
In Labor Force | Age 20-24
Poor
74.5%
Exceptional
75.8%
In Labor Force | Age 25-29
Tragic
81.9%
Good
84.8%
In Labor Force | Age 30-34
Tragic
81.9%
Good
84.7%
In Labor Force | Age 35-44
Tragic
80.9%
Average
84.4%
In Labor Force | Age 45-54
Tragic
79.0%
Average
82.8%

Chickasaw vs Pakistani Family Structure

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Pakistani communities in the United States are seen in single father households (2.8% compared to 2.3%, a difference of 19.6%), divorced or separated (14.2% compared to 11.9%, a difference of 19.4%), and births to unmarried women (36.3% compared to 30.5%, a difference of 19.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of family households (64.4% compared to 64.7%, a difference of 0.40%), average family size (3.19 compared to 3.22, a difference of 0.95%), and family households with children (28.2% compared to 27.9%, a difference of 1.1%).
Chickasaw vs Pakistani Family Structure
Family Structure MetricChickasawPakistani
Family Households
Good
64.4%
Excellent
64.7%
Family Households with Children
Exceptional
28.2%
Exceptional
27.9%
Married-couple Households
Fair
45.9%
Excellent
47.3%
Average Family Size
Tragic
3.19
Fair
3.22
Single Father Households
Tragic
2.8%
Good
2.3%
Single Mother Households
Tragic
7.0%
Good
6.1%
Currently Married
Average
46.6%
Good
47.2%
Divorced or Separated
Tragic
14.2%
Excellent
11.9%
Births to Unmarried Women
Tragic
36.3%
Excellent
30.5%

Chickasaw vs Pakistani Vehicle Availability

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Pakistani communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (7.9% compared to 9.0%, a difference of 14.2%), 4 or more vehicles in household (7.4% compared to 7.0%, a difference of 6.0%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (22.2% compared to 21.0%, a difference of 5.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (92.3% compared to 91.3%, a difference of 1.1%), 2 or more vehicles in household (59.0% compared to 57.9%, a difference of 1.9%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (22.2% compared to 21.0%, a difference of 5.5%).
Chickasaw vs Pakistani Vehicle Availability
Vehicle Availability MetricChickasawPakistani
No Vehicles Available
Exceptional
7.9%
Exceptional
9.0%
1+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
92.3%
Exceptional
91.3%
2+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
59.0%
Exceptional
57.9%
3+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
22.2%
Exceptional
21.0%
4+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
7.4%
Exceptional
7.0%

Chickasaw vs Pakistani Education Level

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Pakistani communities in the United States are seen in professional degree (3.4% compared to 4.8%, a difference of 42.0%), master's degree (11.4% compared to 15.8%, a difference of 38.3%), and doctorate degree (1.5% compared to 2.0%, a difference of 35.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 10th grade (94.1% compared to 93.9%, a difference of 0.16%), nursery school (98.4% compared to 97.9%, a difference of 0.46%), and kindergarten (98.4% compared to 97.9%, a difference of 0.47%).
Chickasaw vs Pakistani Education Level
Education Level MetricChickasawPakistani
No Schooling Completed
Exceptional
1.7%
Average
2.1%
Nursery School
Exceptional
98.4%
Fair
97.9%
Kindergarten
Exceptional
98.4%
Fair
97.9%
1st Grade
Exceptional
98.3%
Fair
97.9%
2nd Grade
Exceptional
98.3%
Fair
97.8%
3rd Grade
Exceptional
98.2%
Fair
97.7%
4th Grade
Exceptional
98.0%
Fair
97.5%
5th Grade
Exceptional
97.9%
Average
97.3%
6th Grade
Exceptional
97.6%
Average
97.0%
7th Grade
Exceptional
96.7%
Average
96.0%
8th Grade
Exceptional
96.4%
Average
95.7%
9th Grade
Exceptional
95.5%
Good
95.0%
10th Grade
Excellent
94.1%
Good
93.9%
11th Grade
Fair
92.3%
Good
92.8%
12th Grade, No Diploma
Tragic
90.3%
Good
91.5%
High School Diploma
Poor
88.4%
Good
89.6%
GED/Equivalency
Tragic
83.8%
Excellent
86.4%
College, Under 1 year
Tragic
60.4%
Exceptional
67.5%
College, 1 year or more
Tragic
53.3%
Exceptional
61.5%
Associate's Degree
Tragic
38.6%
Excellent
48.1%
Bachelor's Degree
Tragic
30.4%
Excellent
39.7%
Master's Degree
Tragic
11.4%
Excellent
15.8%
Professional Degree
Tragic
3.4%
Exceptional
4.8%
Doctorate Degree
Tragic
1.5%
Exceptional
2.0%

Chickasaw vs Pakistani Disability

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Pakistani communities in the United States are seen in vision disability (3.2% compared to 2.1%, a difference of 48.9%), disability age 35 to 64 (16.1% compared to 11.1%, a difference of 44.8%), and hearing disability (4.5% compared to 3.1%, a difference of 42.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of cognitive disability (18.5% compared to 17.3%, a difference of 6.9%), disability age over 75 (51.2% compared to 47.7%, a difference of 7.4%), and self-care disability (2.9% compared to 2.4%, a difference of 17.2%).
Chickasaw vs Pakistani Disability
Disability MetricChickasawPakistani
Disability
Tragic
15.2%
Average
11.7%
Males
Tragic
15.1%
Fair
11.3%
Females
Tragic
15.2%
Excellent
12.0%
Age | Under 5 years
Tragic
1.7%
Poor
1.3%
Age | 5 to 17 years
Tragic
6.8%
Excellent
5.5%
Age | 18 to 34 years
Tragic
9.0%
Fair
6.7%
Age | 35 to 64 years
Tragic
16.1%
Good
11.1%
Age | 65 to 74 years
Tragic
30.2%
Average
23.2%
Age | Over 75 years
Tragic
51.2%
Fair
47.7%
Vision
Tragic
3.2%
Good
2.1%
Hearing
Tragic
4.5%
Poor
3.1%
Cognitive
Tragic
18.5%
Average
17.3%
Ambulatory
Tragic
8.0%
Excellent
6.0%
Self-Care
Tragic
2.9%
Good
2.4%