Chickasaw vs Swedish 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 EuropeanNorwegianOkinawanOsageOttawaPaiutePakistaniPalestinianPanamanianParaguayanPennsylvania GermanPeruvianPimaPolishPortuguesePotawatomiPuebloPuerto RicanPuget Sound SalishRomanianRussianSalvadoranSamoanScandinavianScotch-IrishScottishSeminoleSenegaleseSerbianShoshoneSierra LeoneanSiouxSlavicSlovakSloveneSomaliSouth AfricanSouth AmericanSouth American IndianSoviet UnionSpaniardSpanishSpanish AmericanSpanish American IndianSri LankanSubsaharan AfricanSudaneseSwissSyrianTaiwaneseThaiTlingit-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
Swedish
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

Swedes

Fair
Excellent
3,663
SOCIAL INDEX
34.2/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
212th/ 347
SOCIAL RANK
8,881
SOCIAL INDEX
86.3/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
41st/ 347
SOCIAL RANK

Swedish Integration in Chickasaw Communities

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 146,116,684 people shows no correlation between the proportion of Swedes within Chickasaw communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.007. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Chickasaw within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.001% in Swedes. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Chickasaw corresponds to an increase of 0.7 Swedes.
Chickasaw Integration in Swedish Communities

Chickasaw vs Swedish Income

When considering income, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Swedish communities in the United States are seen in householder income ages 45 - 64 years ($82,193 compared to $106,377, a difference of 29.4%), householder income ages 25 - 44 years ($77,929 compared to $99,136, a difference of 27.2%), and median family income ($85,356 compared to $108,499, a difference of 27.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of wage/income gap (27.2% compared to 29.4%, a difference of 8.3%), median female earnings ($34,414 compared to $39,421, a difference of 14.5%), and householder income over 65 years ($53,732 compared to $62,736, a difference of 16.8%).
Chickasaw vs Swedish Income
Income MetricChickasawSwedish
Per Capita Income
Tragic
$36,475
Exceptional
$45,750
Median Family Income
Tragic
$85,356
Exceptional
$108,499
Median Household Income
Tragic
$70,005
Exceptional
$88,524
Median Earnings
Tragic
$40,672
Excellent
$47,851
Median Male Earnings
Tragic
$47,832
Exceptional
$57,445
Median Female Earnings
Tragic
$34,414
Fair
$39,421
Householder Age | Under 25 years
Tragic
$44,763
Excellent
$52,986
Householder Age | 25 - 44 years
Tragic
$77,929
Exceptional
$99,136
Householder Age | 45 - 64 years
Tragic
$82,193
Exceptional
$106,377
Householder Age | Over 65 years
Tragic
$53,732
Excellent
$62,736
Wage/Income Gap
Tragic
27.2%
Tragic
29.4%

Chickasaw vs Swedish Poverty

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Swedish communities in the United States are seen in family poverty (10.8% compared to 7.1%, a difference of 52.3%), married-couple family poverty (5.8% compared to 3.9%, a difference of 50.2%), and child poverty under the age of 16 (19.5% compared to 13.3%, a difference of 46.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of seniors poverty over the age of 75 (11.6% compared to 10.2%, a difference of 14.6%), single father poverty (19.0% compared to 16.3%, a difference of 16.3%), and single mother poverty (34.4% compared to 28.4%, a difference of 21.1%).
Chickasaw vs Swedish Poverty
Poverty MetricChickasawSwedish
Poverty
Tragic
14.7%
Exceptional
10.6%
Families
Tragic
10.8%
Exceptional
7.1%
Males
Tragic
13.5%
Exceptional
9.6%
Females
Tragic
15.9%
Exceptional
11.6%
Females 18 to 24 years
Tragic
24.5%
Average
20.1%
Females 25 to 34 years
Tragic
17.0%
Exceptional
12.7%
Children Under 5 years
Tragic
21.8%
Exceptional
15.0%
Children Under 16 years
Tragic
19.5%
Exceptional
13.3%
Boys Under 16 years
Tragic
19.8%
Exceptional
13.6%
Girls Under 16 years
Tragic
19.6%
Exceptional
13.7%
Single Males
Tragic
16.3%
Poor
13.1%
Single Females
Tragic
26.3%
Good
20.6%
Single Fathers
Tragic
19.0%
Average
16.3%
Single Mothers
Tragic
34.4%
Excellent
28.4%
Married Couples
Tragic
5.8%
Exceptional
3.9%
Seniors Over 65 years
Good
10.7%
Exceptional
8.7%
Seniors Over 75 years
Exceptional
11.6%
Exceptional
10.2%
Receiving Food Stamps
Tragic
13.1%
Exceptional
9.2%

Chickasaw vs Swedish Unemployment

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Swedish communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among seniors over 75 years (7.3% compared to 10.0%, a difference of 36.0%), unemployment among women with children under 6 years (9.0% compared to 7.4%, a difference of 21.3%), and unemployment among ages 30 to 34 years (6.2% compared to 5.1%, a difference of 20.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among women with children ages 6 to 17 years (8.6% compared to 8.6%, a difference of 0.010%), unemployment among ages 60 to 64 years (4.3% compared to 4.5%, a difference of 4.5%), and unemployment among ages 20 to 24 years (9.9% compared to 9.5%, a difference of 4.8%).
Chickasaw vs Swedish Unemployment
Unemployment MetricChickasawSwedish
Unemployment
Exceptional
5.0%
Exceptional
4.4%
Males
Excellent
5.2%
Exceptional
4.6%
Females
Excellent
5.1%
Exceptional
4.4%
Youth < 25
Exceptional
11.2%
Exceptional
10.4%
Age | 16 to 19 years
Exceptional
16.7%
Exceptional
15.3%
Age | 20 to 24 years
Exceptional
9.9%
Exceptional
9.5%
Age | 25 to 29 years
Fair
6.7%
Exceptional
6.2%
Age | 30 to 34 years
Tragic
6.2%
Exceptional
5.1%
Age | 35 to 44 years
Tragic
4.9%
Exceptional
4.2%
Age | 45 to 54 years
Exceptional
4.2%
Exceptional
4.0%
Age | 55 to 59 years
Good
4.8%
Exceptional
4.4%
Age | 60 to 64 years
Exceptional
4.3%
Exceptional
4.5%
Age | 65 to 74 years
Exceptional
4.7%
Exceptional
5.1%
Seniors > 65
Exceptional
4.4%
Exceptional
4.9%
Seniors > 75
Exceptional
7.3%
Tragic
10.0%
Women w/ Children < 6
Tragic
9.0%
Excellent
7.4%
Women w/ Children 6 to 17
Exceptional
8.6%
Exceptional
8.6%
Women w/ Children < 18
Good
5.4%
Exceptional
4.7%

Chickasaw vs Swedish Labor Participation

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Swedish communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (38.3% compared to 44.1%, a difference of 15.1%), in labor force | age 45-54 (79.0% compared to 83.7%, a difference of 5.9%), and in labor force | age 20-24 (74.5% compared to 78.8%, a difference of 5.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 30-34 (81.9% compared to 85.2%, a difference of 4.0%), in labor force | age > 16 (62.3% compared to 65.1%, a difference of 4.5%), and in labor force | age 25-29 (81.9% compared to 85.6%, a difference of 4.6%).
Chickasaw vs Swedish Labor Participation
Labor Participation MetricChickasawSwedish
In Labor Force | Age > 16
Tragic
62.3%
Average
65.1%
In Labor Force | Age 20-64
Tragic
76.2%
Exceptional
80.3%
In Labor Force | Age 16-19
Exceptional
38.3%
Exceptional
44.1%
In Labor Force | Age 20-24
Poor
74.5%
Exceptional
78.8%
In Labor Force | Age 25-29
Tragic
81.9%
Exceptional
85.6%
In Labor Force | Age 30-34
Tragic
81.9%
Exceptional
85.2%
In Labor Force | Age 35-44
Tragic
80.9%
Exceptional
85.0%
In Labor Force | Age 45-54
Tragic
79.0%
Exceptional
83.7%

Chickasaw vs Swedish Family Structure

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Swedish communities in the United States are seen in single mother households (7.0% compared to 5.5%, a difference of 28.2%), births to unmarried women (36.3% compared to 29.6%, a difference of 22.4%), and single father households (2.8% compared to 2.3%, a difference of 18.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of family households (64.4% compared to 64.5%, a difference of 0.13%), average family size (3.19 compared to 3.10, a difference of 2.8%), and family households with children (28.2% compared to 27.4%, a difference of 3.1%).
Chickasaw vs Swedish Family Structure
Family Structure MetricChickasawSwedish
Family Households
Good
64.4%
Good
64.5%
Family Households with Children
Exceptional
28.2%
Fair
27.4%
Married-couple Households
Fair
45.9%
Exceptional
49.7%
Average Family Size
Tragic
3.19
Tragic
3.10
Single Father Households
Tragic
2.8%
Good
2.3%
Single Mother Households
Tragic
7.0%
Exceptional
5.5%
Currently Married
Average
46.6%
Exceptional
50.0%
Divorced or Separated
Tragic
14.2%
Fair
12.1%
Births to Unmarried Women
Tragic
36.3%
Exceptional
29.6%

Chickasaw vs Swedish Vehicle Availability

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Swedish communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (7.9% compared to 6.8%, a difference of 15.7%), 2 or more vehicles in household (59.0% compared to 61.8%, a difference of 4.8%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (22.2% compared to 23.0%, a difference of 3.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (92.3% compared to 93.3%, a difference of 1.1%), 4 or more vehicles in household (7.4% compared to 7.6%, a difference of 2.4%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (22.2% compared to 23.0%, a difference of 3.5%).
Chickasaw vs Swedish Vehicle Availability
Vehicle Availability MetricChickasawSwedish
No Vehicles Available
Exceptional
7.9%
Exceptional
6.8%
1+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
92.3%
Exceptional
93.3%
2+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
59.0%
Exceptional
61.8%
3+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
22.2%
Exceptional
23.0%
4+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
7.4%
Exceptional
7.6%

Chickasaw vs Swedish Education Level

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Swedish communities in the United States are seen in professional degree (3.4% compared to 4.5%, a difference of 35.1%), master's degree (11.4% compared to 15.2%, a difference of 33.4%), and doctorate degree (1.5% compared to 2.0%, a difference of 30.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of nursery school (98.4% compared to 98.7%, a difference of 0.29%), kindergarten (98.4% compared to 98.7%, a difference of 0.29%), and 1st grade (98.3% compared to 98.6%, a difference of 0.30%).
Chickasaw vs Swedish Education Level
Education Level MetricChickasawSwedish
No Schooling Completed
Exceptional
1.7%
Exceptional
1.4%
Nursery School
Exceptional
98.4%
Exceptional
98.7%
Kindergarten
Exceptional
98.4%
Exceptional
98.7%
1st Grade
Exceptional
98.3%
Exceptional
98.6%
2nd Grade
Exceptional
98.3%
Exceptional
98.6%
3rd Grade
Exceptional
98.2%
Exceptional
98.5%
4th Grade
Exceptional
98.0%
Exceptional
98.4%
5th Grade
Exceptional
97.9%
Exceptional
98.3%
6th Grade
Exceptional
97.6%
Exceptional
98.2%
7th Grade
Exceptional
96.7%
Exceptional
97.6%
8th Grade
Exceptional
96.4%
Exceptional
97.4%
9th Grade
Exceptional
95.5%
Exceptional
96.7%
10th Grade
Excellent
94.1%
Exceptional
95.9%
11th Grade
Fair
92.3%
Exceptional
94.9%
12th Grade, No Diploma
Tragic
90.3%
Exceptional
93.7%
High School Diploma
Poor
88.4%
Exceptional
92.2%
GED/Equivalency
Tragic
83.8%
Exceptional
88.8%
College, Under 1 year
Tragic
60.4%
Exceptional
68.7%
College, 1 year or more
Tragic
53.3%
Exceptional
62.1%
Associate's Degree
Tragic
38.6%
Exceptional
48.4%
Bachelor's Degree
Tragic
30.4%
Good
39.1%
Master's Degree
Tragic
11.4%
Good
15.2%
Professional Degree
Tragic
3.4%
Good
4.5%
Doctorate Degree
Tragic
1.5%
Excellent
2.0%

Chickasaw vs Swedish Disability

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Swedish communities in the United States are seen in vision disability (3.2% compared to 2.1%, a difference of 53.5%), disability age 35 to 64 (16.1% compared to 11.4%, a difference of 40.7%), and disability age 65 to 74 (30.2% compared to 22.4%, a difference of 35.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of disability age under 5 (1.7% compared to 1.6%, a difference of 10.2%), cognitive disability (18.5% compared to 16.5%, a difference of 11.9%), and disability age over 75 (51.2% compared to 45.7%, a difference of 12.1%).
Chickasaw vs Swedish Disability
Disability MetricChickasawSwedish
Disability
Tragic
15.2%
Tragic
12.2%
Males
Tragic
15.1%
Tragic
12.1%
Females
Tragic
15.2%
Fair
12.3%
Age | Under 5 years
Tragic
1.7%
Tragic
1.6%
Age | 5 to 17 years
Tragic
6.8%
Tragic
5.8%
Age | 18 to 34 years
Tragic
9.0%
Tragic
7.5%
Age | 35 to 64 years
Tragic
16.1%
Fair
11.4%
Age | 65 to 74 years
Tragic
30.2%
Exceptional
22.4%
Age | Over 75 years
Tragic
51.2%
Exceptional
45.7%
Vision
Tragic
3.2%
Exceptional
2.1%
Hearing
Tragic
4.5%
Tragic
3.6%
Cognitive
Tragic
18.5%
Exceptional
16.5%
Ambulatory
Tragic
8.0%
Excellent
6.0%
Self-Care
Tragic
2.9%
Exceptional
2.3%