Immigrants from Eastern Asia vs Ecuadorian Community Comparison

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 308,057,644 people shows a poor positive correlation between the proportion of Ecuadorians within Immigrant from Eastern Asia communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.131. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Immigrants from Eastern Asia within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.005% in Ecuadorians. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Immigrants from Eastern Asia corresponds to an increase of 5.3 Ecuadorians.

When considering income, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Eastern Asia and Ecuadorian communities in the United States are seen in median family income ($125,150 compared to $95,114, a difference of 31.6%), householder income ages 45 - 64 years ($122,222 compared to $93,739, a difference of 30.4%), and median male earnings ($66,903 compared to $51,596, a difference of 29.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of householder income under 25 years ($57,123 compared to $53,911, a difference of 6.0%), wage/income gap (27.1% compared to 22.9%, a difference of 18.1%), and median female earnings ($46,502 compared to $39,117, a difference of 18.9%).

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Eastern Asia and Ecuadorian communities in the United States are seen in receiving food stamps (9.3% compared to 14.9%, a difference of 59.7%), child poverty among boys under 16 (13.3% compared to 19.3%, a difference of 44.8%), and child poverty under the age of 16 (13.1% compared to 19.0%, a difference of 44.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of female poverty among 18-24 year olds (19.8% compared to 19.1%, a difference of 3.3%), single male poverty (11.4% compared to 12.5%, a difference of 9.4%), and single father poverty (15.0% compared to 16.5%, a difference of 10.3%).

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Eastern Asia and Ecuadorian communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among women with children under 18 years (4.9% compared to 6.5%, a difference of 32.4%), unemployment among women with children ages 6 to 17 years (7.7% compared to 10.0%, a difference of 29.8%), and unemployment among women with children under 6 years (6.3% compared to 7.9%, a difference of 25.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among ages 65 to 74 years (5.3% compared to 5.8%, a difference of 8.9%), unemployment among seniors over 65 years (5.1% compared to 5.6%, a difference of 9.0%), and unemployment among seniors over 75 years (7.9% compared to 8.6%, a difference of 9.0%).

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Eastern Asia and Ecuadorian communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (32.0% compared to 31.4%, a difference of 2.0%), in labor force | age 45-54 (83.4% compared to 82.3%, a difference of 1.3%), and in labor force | age 30-34 (85.4% compared to 84.4%, a difference of 1.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age > 16 (65.7% compared to 65.6%, a difference of 0.010%), in labor force | age 25-29 (84.8% compared to 84.4%, a difference of 0.50%), and in labor force | age 35-44 (84.7% compared to 84.2%, a difference of 0.58%).

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Eastern Asia and Ecuadorian communities in the United States are seen in single mother households (5.1% compared to 7.2%, a difference of 41.2%), births to unmarried women (25.0% compared to 33.3%, a difference of 32.9%), and single father households (1.9% compared to 2.4%, a difference of 26.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of family households (64.9% compared to 65.0%, a difference of 0.070%), family households with children (27.7% compared to 27.8%, a difference of 0.43%), and average family size (3.22 compared to 3.32, a difference of 2.9%).

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Eastern Asia and Ecuadorian communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (13.5% compared to 22.8%, a difference of 67.9%), 4 or more vehicles in household (6.2% compared to 4.5%, a difference of 39.2%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (18.8% compared to 14.1%, a difference of 34.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (86.5% compared to 77.9%, a difference of 11.0%), 2 or more vehicles in household (53.2% compared to 42.0%, a difference of 26.8%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (18.8% compared to 14.1%, a difference of 34.0%).

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Eastern Asia and Ecuadorian communities in the United States are seen in doctorate degree (3.0% compared to 1.5%, a difference of 103.1%), professional degree (6.6% compared to 3.9%, a difference of 67.5%), and master's degree (20.8% compared to 14.0%, a difference of 48.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of nursery school (97.7% compared to 97.1%, a difference of 0.62%), kindergarten (97.6% compared to 97.0%, a difference of 0.63%), and 1st grade (97.6% compared to 97.0%, a difference of 0.63%).

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Eastern Asia and Ecuadorian communities in the United States are seen in vision disability (1.8% compared to 2.3%, a difference of 24.0%), disability age 35 to 64 (8.8% compared to 10.7%, a difference of 21.6%), and disability age 5 to 17 (4.6% compared to 5.5%, a difference of 20.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of cognitive disability (16.8% compared to 17.2%, a difference of 2.5%), disability age over 75 (46.2% compared to 47.4%, a difference of 2.6%), and disability age 18 to 34 (5.6% compared to 5.8%, a difference of 4.0%).