Chickasaw vs Vietnamese Community Comparison

COMPARE

Chickasaw
Race
Ancestry
AfghanAfricanAlaska NativeAlaskan AthabascanAlbanianAleutAlsatianAmericanApacheArabArapahoArgentineanArmenianAssyrian/Chaldean/SyriacAustralianAustrianBahamianBangladeshiBarbadianBasqueBelgianBelizeanBermudanBhutaneseBlackfeetBolivianBrazilianBritishBritish West IndianBulgarianBurmeseCajunCambodianCanadianCape VerdeanCarpatho RusynCelticCentral AmericanCentral American IndianCherokeeCheyenneChickasawChileanChineseChippewaChoctawColombianComancheCosta RicanCreeCreekCroatianCrowCubanCypriotCzechCzechoslovakianDanishDelawareDominicanDutchDutch West IndianEastern EuropeanEcuadorianEgyptianEnglishEstonianEthiopianEuropeanFijianFilipinoFinnishFrenchFrench American IndianFrench CanadianGermanGerman RussianGhanaianGreekGuamanian/ChamorroGuatemalanGuyaneseHaitianHmongHonduranHopiHoumaHungarianIcelanderIndian (Asian)IndonesianInupiatIranianIraqiIrishIroquoisIsraeliItalianJamaicanJapaneseJordanianKenyanKiowaKoreanLaotianLatvianLebaneseLiberianLithuanianLumbeeLuxembourgerMacedonianMalaysianMalteseMarshalleseMexicanMexican 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 IslanderUgandanUkrainianUruguayanVenezuelanWelshWest 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
Vietnamese
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

Vietnamese

Fair
Fair
3,663
SOCIAL INDEX
34.2/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
212th/ 347
SOCIAL RANK
2,448
SOCIAL INDEX
22.0/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
257th/ 347
SOCIAL RANK

Vietnamese Integration in Chickasaw Communities

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 83,561,946 people shows a significant negative correlation between the proportion of Vietnamese within Chickasaw communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of -0.609. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Chickasaw within a typical geography, there is a decrease of 0.028% in Vietnamese. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Chickasaw corresponds to a decrease of 27.7 Vietnamese.
Chickasaw Integration in Vietnamese Communities

Chickasaw vs Vietnamese Income

When considering income, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Vietnamese communities in the United States are seen in wage/income gap (27.2% compared to 21.0%, a difference of 29.3%), householder income under 25 years ($44,763 compared to $56,127, a difference of 25.4%), and householder income ages 25 - 44 years ($77,929 compared to $92,089, a difference of 18.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of householder income over 65 years ($53,732 compared to $56,143, a difference of 4.5%), median male earnings ($47,832 compared to $52,525, a difference of 9.8%), and median family income ($85,356 compared to $96,123, a difference of 12.6%).
Chickasaw vs Vietnamese Income
Income MetricChickasawVietnamese
Per Capita Income
Tragic
$36,475
Poor
$42,368
Median Family Income
Tragic
$85,356
Tragic
$96,123
Median Household Income
Tragic
$70,005
Poor
$82,248
Median Earnings
Tragic
$40,672
Average
$46,172
Median Male Earnings
Tragic
$47,832
Poor
$52,525
Median Female Earnings
Tragic
$34,414
Excellent
$40,377
Householder Age | Under 25 years
Tragic
$44,763
Exceptional
$56,127
Householder Age | 25 - 44 years
Tragic
$77,929
Fair
$92,089
Householder Age | 45 - 64 years
Tragic
$82,193
Tragic
$93,788
Householder Age | Over 65 years
Tragic
$53,732
Tragic
$56,143
Wage/Income Gap
Tragic
27.2%
Exceptional
21.0%

Chickasaw vs Vietnamese Poverty

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Vietnamese communities in the United States are seen in seniors poverty over the age of 75 (11.6% compared to 15.9%, a difference of 36.3%), seniors poverty over the age of 65 (10.7% compared to 14.0%, a difference of 30.6%), and single male poverty (16.3% compared to 12.7%, a difference of 28.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of child poverty under the age of 16 (19.5% compared to 19.4%, a difference of 0.18%), child poverty among girls under 16 (19.6% compared to 19.5%, a difference of 0.52%), and child poverty among boys under 16 (19.8% compared to 19.6%, a difference of 1.1%).
Chickasaw vs Vietnamese Poverty
Poverty MetricChickasawVietnamese
Poverty
Tragic
14.7%
Tragic
15.0%
Families
Tragic
10.8%
Tragic
11.5%
Males
Tragic
13.5%
Tragic
13.8%
Females
Tragic
15.9%
Tragic
16.1%
Females 18 to 24 years
Tragic
24.5%
Tragic
21.4%
Females 25 to 34 years
Tragic
17.0%
Tragic
14.6%
Children Under 5 years
Tragic
21.8%
Tragic
19.5%
Children Under 16 years
Tragic
19.5%
Tragic
19.4%
Boys Under 16 years
Tragic
19.8%
Tragic
19.6%
Girls Under 16 years
Tragic
19.6%
Tragic
19.5%
Single Males
Tragic
16.3%
Good
12.7%
Single Females
Tragic
26.3%
Tragic
22.0%
Single Fathers
Tragic
19.0%
Average
16.3%
Single Mothers
Tragic
34.4%
Tragic
30.9%
Married Couples
Tragic
5.8%
Tragic
7.4%
Seniors Over 65 years
Good
10.7%
Tragic
14.0%
Seniors Over 75 years
Exceptional
11.6%
Tragic
15.9%
Receiving Food Stamps
Tragic
13.1%
Tragic
15.7%

Chickasaw vs Vietnamese Unemployment

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Vietnamese communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among ages 60 to 64 years (4.3% compared to 6.1%, a difference of 40.6%), unemployment among seniors over 65 years (4.4% compared to 5.7%, a difference of 29.5%), and unemployment among ages 16 to 19 years (16.7% compared to 21.5%, a difference of 29.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among women with children under 6 years (9.0% compared to 8.8%, a difference of 2.4%), unemployment among women with children ages 6 to 17 years (8.6% compared to 8.9%, a difference of 3.2%), and unemployment among ages 30 to 34 years (6.2% compared to 6.5%, a difference of 4.8%).
Chickasaw vs Vietnamese Unemployment
Unemployment MetricChickasawVietnamese
Unemployment
Exceptional
5.0%
Tragic
6.5%
Males
Excellent
5.2%
Tragic
6.6%
Females
Excellent
5.1%
Tragic
6.5%
Youth < 25
Exceptional
11.2%
Tragic
14.3%
Age | 16 to 19 years
Exceptional
16.7%
Tragic
21.5%
Age | 20 to 24 years
Exceptional
9.9%
Tragic
12.6%
Age | 25 to 29 years
Fair
6.7%
Tragic
7.6%
Age | 30 to 34 years
Tragic
6.2%
Tragic
6.5%
Age | 35 to 44 years
Tragic
4.9%
Tragic
5.4%
Age | 45 to 54 years
Exceptional
4.2%
Tragic
5.4%
Age | 55 to 59 years
Good
4.8%
Tragic
5.9%
Age | 60 to 64 years
Exceptional
4.3%
Tragic
6.1%
Age | 65 to 74 years
Exceptional
4.7%
Tragic
5.9%
Seniors > 65
Exceptional
4.4%
Tragic
5.7%
Seniors > 75
Exceptional
7.3%
Tragic
9.1%
Women w/ Children < 6
Tragic
9.0%
Tragic
8.8%
Women w/ Children 6 to 17
Exceptional
8.6%
Good
8.9%
Women w/ Children < 18
Good
5.4%
Tragic
6.5%

Chickasaw vs Vietnamese Labor Participation

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Vietnamese communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (38.3% compared to 29.6%, a difference of 29.7%), in labor force | age 20-24 (74.5% compared to 70.6%, a difference of 5.4%), and in labor force | age > 16 (62.3% compared to 64.6%, a difference of 3.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 25-29 (81.9% compared to 82.8%, a difference of 1.2%), in labor force | age 30-34 (81.9% compared to 83.6%, a difference of 2.0%), and in labor force | age 45-54 (79.0% compared to 80.8%, a difference of 2.2%).
Chickasaw vs Vietnamese Labor Participation
Labor Participation MetricChickasawVietnamese
In Labor Force | Age > 16
Tragic
62.3%
Tragic
64.6%
In Labor Force | Age 20-64
Tragic
76.2%
Tragic
78.0%
In Labor Force | Age 16-19
Exceptional
38.3%
Tragic
29.6%
In Labor Force | Age 20-24
Poor
74.5%
Tragic
70.6%
In Labor Force | Age 25-29
Tragic
81.9%
Tragic
82.8%
In Labor Force | Age 30-34
Tragic
81.9%
Tragic
83.6%
In Labor Force | Age 35-44
Tragic
80.9%
Tragic
83.5%
In Labor Force | Age 45-54
Tragic
79.0%
Tragic
80.8%

Chickasaw vs Vietnamese Family Structure

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Vietnamese communities in the United States are seen in single father households (2.8% compared to 2.0%, a difference of 34.8%), divorced or separated (14.2% compared to 10.8%, a difference of 32.0%), and births to unmarried women (36.3% compared to 30.2%, a difference of 20.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of family households (64.4% compared to 64.2%, a difference of 0.24%), family households with children (28.2% compared to 27.7%, a difference of 1.9%), and married-couple households (45.9% compared to 43.6%, a difference of 5.2%).
Chickasaw vs Vietnamese Family Structure
Family Structure MetricChickasawVietnamese
Family Households
Good
64.4%
Average
64.2%
Family Households with Children
Exceptional
28.2%
Excellent
27.7%
Married-couple Households
Fair
45.9%
Tragic
43.6%
Average Family Size
Tragic
3.19
Exceptional
3.37
Single Father Households
Tragic
2.8%
Exceptional
2.0%
Single Mother Households
Tragic
7.0%
Poor
6.7%
Currently Married
Average
46.6%
Tragic
44.0%
Divorced or Separated
Tragic
14.2%
Exceptional
10.8%
Births to Unmarried Women
Tragic
36.3%
Excellent
30.2%

Chickasaw vs Vietnamese Vehicle Availability

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Vietnamese communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (7.9% compared to 26.2%, a difference of 233.8%), 4 or more vehicles in household (7.4% compared to 3.9%, a difference of 91.7%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (22.2% compared to 12.5%, a difference of 78.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (92.3% compared to 73.8%, a difference of 25.0%), 2 or more vehicles in household (59.0% compared to 38.5%, a difference of 53.2%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (22.2% compared to 12.5%, a difference of 78.3%).
Chickasaw vs Vietnamese Vehicle Availability
Vehicle Availability MetricChickasawVietnamese
No Vehicles Available
Exceptional
7.9%
Tragic
26.2%
1+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
92.3%
Tragic
73.8%
2+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
59.0%
Tragic
38.5%
3+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
22.2%
Tragic
12.5%
4+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
7.4%
Tragic
3.9%

Chickasaw vs Vietnamese Education Level

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Vietnamese communities in the United States are seen in no schooling completed (1.7% compared to 3.2%, a difference of 87.5%), master's degree (11.4% compared to 15.8%, a difference of 38.1%), and professional degree (3.4% compared to 4.5%, a difference of 34.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of nursery school (98.4% compared to 96.8%, a difference of 1.6%), kindergarten (98.4% compared to 96.8%, a difference of 1.6%), and 1st grade (98.3% compared to 96.8%, a difference of 1.6%).
Chickasaw vs Vietnamese Education Level
Education Level MetricChickasawVietnamese
No Schooling Completed
Exceptional
1.7%
Tragic
3.2%
Nursery School
Exceptional
98.4%
Tragic
96.8%
Kindergarten
Exceptional
98.4%
Tragic
96.8%
1st Grade
Exceptional
98.3%
Tragic
96.8%
2nd Grade
Exceptional
98.3%
Tragic
96.7%
3rd Grade
Exceptional
98.2%
Tragic
96.5%
4th Grade
Exceptional
98.0%
Tragic
96.2%
5th Grade
Exceptional
97.9%
Tragic
95.9%
6th Grade
Exceptional
97.6%
Tragic
95.3%
7th Grade
Exceptional
96.7%
Tragic
93.9%
8th Grade
Exceptional
96.4%
Tragic
93.5%
9th Grade
Exceptional
95.5%
Tragic
92.3%
10th Grade
Excellent
94.1%
Tragic
90.9%
11th Grade
Fair
92.3%
Tragic
89.4%
12th Grade, No Diploma
Tragic
90.3%
Tragic
87.9%
High School Diploma
Poor
88.4%
Tragic
85.4%
GED/Equivalency
Tragic
83.8%
Tragic
81.9%
College, Under 1 year
Tragic
60.4%
Tragic
61.7%
College, 1 year or more
Tragic
53.3%
Tragic
57.0%
Associate's Degree
Tragic
38.6%
Fair
45.8%
Bachelor's Degree
Tragic
30.4%
Good
38.5%
Master's Degree
Tragic
11.4%
Excellent
15.8%
Professional Degree
Tragic
3.4%
Good
4.5%
Doctorate Degree
Tragic
1.5%
Average
1.9%

Chickasaw vs Vietnamese Disability

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Vietnamese communities in the United States are seen in disability age under 5 (1.7% compared to 0.81%, a difference of 114.3%), hearing disability (4.5% compared to 2.4%, a difference of 87.5%), and disability age 18 to 34 (9.0% compared to 5.5%, a difference of 62.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of cognitive disability (18.5% compared to 17.7%, a difference of 4.5%), disability age over 75 (51.2% compared to 47.9%, a difference of 6.9%), and self-care disability (2.9% compared to 2.6%, a difference of 10.8%).
Chickasaw vs Vietnamese Disability
Disability MetricChickasawVietnamese
Disability
Tragic
15.2%
Exceptional
10.9%
Males
Tragic
15.1%
Exceptional
10.1%
Females
Tragic
15.2%
Exceptional
11.6%
Age | Under 5 years
Tragic
1.7%
Exceptional
0.81%
Age | 5 to 17 years
Tragic
6.8%
Exceptional
5.1%
Age | 18 to 34 years
Tragic
9.0%
Exceptional
5.5%
Age | 35 to 64 years
Tragic
16.1%
Exceptional
10.6%
Age | 65 to 74 years
Tragic
30.2%
Good
23.2%
Age | Over 75 years
Tragic
51.2%
Poor
47.9%
Vision
Tragic
3.2%
Excellent
2.1%
Hearing
Tragic
4.5%
Exceptional
2.4%
Cognitive
Tragic
18.5%
Tragic
17.7%
Ambulatory
Tragic
8.0%
Average
6.1%
Self-Care
Tragic
2.9%
Tragic
2.6%