Immigrants from Oceania vs Chippewa Community Comparison

COMPARE

Immigrants from Oceania
Race
Ancestry
AfghanAfricanAlaska NativeAlaskan AthabascanAlbanianAleutAlsatianAmericanApacheArabArapahoArgentineanArmenianAssyrian/Chaldean/SyriacAustralianAustrianBahamianBangladeshiBarbadianBasqueBelgianBelizeanBermudanBhutaneseBlackfeetBolivianBrazilianBritishBritish West IndianBulgarianBurmeseCajunCambodianCanadianCape VerdeanCarpatho RusynCelticCentral AmericanCentral American IndianCherokeeCheyenneChickasawChileanChineseChoctawColombianColvilleComancheCosta 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
Chippewa
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 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 EuropeNorwayPakistanPanamaPeruPhilippinesPolandPortugalRomaniaRussiaSaudi 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

Immigrants from Oceania

Chippewa

Average
Fair
6,183
SOCIAL INDEX
59.3/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
161st/ 347
SOCIAL RANK
2,429
SOCIAL INDEX
21.8/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
259th/ 347
SOCIAL RANK

Chippewa Integration in Immigrants from Oceania Communities

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 158,354,179 people shows a moderate positive correlation between the proportion of Chippewa within Immigrant from Oceania communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.479. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Immigrants from Oceania within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.022% in Chippewa. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Immigrants from Oceania corresponds to an increase of 21.9 Chippewa.
Immigrants from Oceania Integration in Chippewa Communities

Immigrants from Oceania vs Chippewa Income

When considering income, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Oceania and Chippewa communities in the United States are seen in median household income ($89,100 compared to $70,539, a difference of 26.3%), householder income ages 45 - 64 years ($103,705 compared to $83,943, a difference of 23.5%), and per capita income ($45,220 compared to $36,631, a difference of 23.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of wage/income gap (25.6% compared to 25.0%, a difference of 2.7%), householder income under 25 years ($53,680 compared to $47,015, a difference of 14.2%), and median female earnings ($40,297 compared to $35,003, a difference of 15.1%).
Immigrants from Oceania vs Chippewa Income
Income MetricImmigrants from OceaniaChippewa
Per Capita Income
Excellent
$45,220
Tragic
$36,631
Median Family Income
Excellent
$106,453
Tragic
$86,852
Median Household Income
Exceptional
$89,100
Tragic
$70,539
Median Earnings
Excellent
$47,617
Tragic
$40,287
Median Male Earnings
Good
$55,712
Tragic
$46,368
Median Female Earnings
Good
$40,297
Tragic
$35,003
Householder Age | Under 25 years
Exceptional
$53,680
Tragic
$47,015
Householder Age | 25 - 44 years
Excellent
$97,623
Tragic
$80,005
Householder Age | 45 - 64 years
Excellent
$103,705
Tragic
$83,943
Householder Age | Over 65 years
Exceptional
$64,416
Tragic
$53,847
Wage/Income Gap
Average
25.6%
Excellent
25.0%

Immigrants from Oceania vs Chippewa Poverty

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Oceania and Chippewa communities in the United States are seen in child poverty under the age of 5 (16.9% compared to 23.4%, a difference of 38.4%), female poverty among 25-34 year olds (13.5% compared to 18.0%, a difference of 33.1%), and single male poverty (12.4% compared to 16.4%, a difference of 31.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of married-couple family poverty (5.0% compared to 5.4%, a difference of 8.3%), seniors poverty over the age of 75 (11.7% compared to 13.1%, a difference of 11.9%), and seniors poverty over the age of 65 (10.4% compared to 12.1%, a difference of 16.2%).
Immigrants from Oceania vs Chippewa Poverty
Poverty MetricImmigrants from OceaniaChippewa
Poverty
Average
12.3%
Tragic
15.7%
Families
Good
8.7%
Tragic
11.2%
Males
Average
11.2%
Tragic
14.6%
Females
Average
13.3%
Tragic
16.7%
Females 18 to 24 years
Excellent
19.7%
Tragic
25.9%
Females 25 to 34 years
Average
13.5%
Tragic
18.0%
Children Under 5 years
Good
16.9%
Tragic
23.4%
Children Under 16 years
Good
15.9%
Tragic
20.5%
Boys Under 16 years
Good
16.0%
Tragic
21.0%
Girls Under 16 years
Good
16.1%
Tragic
20.6%
Single Males
Exceptional
12.4%
Tragic
16.4%
Single Females
Good
20.7%
Tragic
26.8%
Single Fathers
Exceptional
15.4%
Tragic
18.8%
Single Mothers
Good
28.7%
Tragic
34.8%
Married Couples
Good
5.0%
Poor
5.4%
Seniors Over 65 years
Excellent
10.4%
Tragic
12.1%
Seniors Over 75 years
Excellent
11.7%
Tragic
13.1%
Receiving Food Stamps
Good
11.4%
Tragic
14.7%

Immigrants from Oceania vs Chippewa Unemployment

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Oceania and Chippewa communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among women with children under 6 years (7.5% compared to 13.3%, a difference of 78.2%), unemployment among ages 30 to 34 years (5.4% compared to 7.8%, a difference of 44.0%), and unemployment among women with children ages 6 to 17 years (8.1% compared to 11.1%, a difference of 37.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among ages 16 to 19 years (17.2% compared to 18.0%, a difference of 4.1%), unemployment among ages 60 to 64 years (4.7% compared to 4.9%, a difference of 5.6%), and unemployment among seniors over 65 years (5.0% compared to 5.4%, a difference of 8.0%).
Immigrants from Oceania vs Chippewa Unemployment
Unemployment MetricImmigrants from OceaniaChippewa
Unemployment
Good
5.2%
Tragic
6.2%
Males
Average
5.3%
Tragic
6.6%
Females
Good
5.2%
Tragic
6.1%
Youth < 25
Excellent
11.4%
Tragic
13.5%
Age | 16 to 19 years
Excellent
17.2%
Poor
18.0%
Age | 20 to 24 years
Exceptional
10.0%
Tragic
12.3%
Age | 25 to 29 years
Exceptional
6.4%
Tragic
7.8%
Age | 30 to 34 years
Good
5.4%
Tragic
7.8%
Age | 35 to 44 years
Fair
4.8%
Tragic
6.2%
Age | 45 to 54 years
Excellent
4.4%
Tragic
5.5%
Age | 55 to 59 years
Exceptional
4.7%
Tragic
5.9%
Age | 60 to 64 years
Exceptional
4.7%
Poor
4.9%
Age | 65 to 74 years
Exceptional
5.2%
Tragic
5.7%
Seniors > 65
Exceptional
5.0%
Tragic
5.4%
Seniors > 75
Poor
9.0%
Tragic
10.1%
Women w/ Children < 6
Good
7.5%
Tragic
13.3%
Women w/ Children 6 to 17
Exceptional
8.1%
Tragic
11.1%
Women w/ Children < 18
Excellent
5.3%
Tragic
7.0%

Immigrants from Oceania vs Chippewa Labor Participation

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Oceania and Chippewa communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (37.9% compared to 43.8%, a difference of 15.6%), in labor force | age > 16 (65.5% compared to 63.1%, a difference of 3.7%), and in labor force | age 20-64 (79.3% compared to 77.3%, a difference of 2.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 45-54 (82.1% compared to 81.3%, a difference of 1.0%), in labor force | age 35-44 (83.9% compared to 82.9%, a difference of 1.2%), and in labor force | age 20-24 (76.1% compared to 77.1%, a difference of 1.2%).
Immigrants from Oceania vs Chippewa Labor Participation
Labor Participation MetricImmigrants from OceaniaChippewa
In Labor Force | Age > 16
Excellent
65.5%
Tragic
63.1%
In Labor Force | Age 20-64
Poor
79.3%
Tragic
77.3%
In Labor Force | Age 16-19
Exceptional
37.9%
Exceptional
43.8%
In Labor Force | Age 20-24
Exceptional
76.1%
Exceptional
77.1%
In Labor Force | Age 25-29
Tragic
84.2%
Tragic
82.9%
In Labor Force | Age 30-34
Tragic
84.0%
Tragic
82.6%
In Labor Force | Age 35-44
Tragic
83.9%
Tragic
82.9%
In Labor Force | Age 45-54
Tragic
82.1%
Tragic
81.3%

Immigrants from Oceania vs Chippewa Family Structure

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Oceania and Chippewa communities in the United States are seen in births to unmarried women (30.6% compared to 42.6%, a difference of 39.4%), single mother households (6.3% compared to 8.0%, a difference of 27.0%), and single father households (2.5% compared to 3.1%, a difference of 25.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of average family size (3.29 compared to 3.20, a difference of 2.8%), family households (64.9% compared to 62.1%, a difference of 4.5%), and family households with children (28.1% compared to 26.7%, a difference of 5.1%).
Immigrants from Oceania vs Chippewa Family Structure
Family Structure MetricImmigrants from OceaniaChippewa
Family Households
Exceptional
64.9%
Tragic
62.1%
Family Households with Children
Exceptional
28.1%
Tragic
26.7%
Married-couple Households
Good
46.9%
Tragic
42.1%
Average Family Size
Exceptional
3.29
Poor
3.20
Single Father Households
Tragic
2.5%
Tragic
3.1%
Single Mother Households
Average
6.3%
Tragic
8.0%
Currently Married
Average
46.5%
Tragic
43.2%
Divorced or Separated
Good
11.9%
Tragic
13.2%
Births to Unmarried Women
Excellent
30.6%
Tragic
42.6%

Immigrants from Oceania vs Chippewa Vehicle Availability

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Oceania and Chippewa communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (9.7% compared to 9.4%, a difference of 3.0%), 3 or more vehicles in household (21.8% compared to 21.5%, a difference of 1.3%), and 4 or more vehicles in household (7.6% compared to 7.6%, a difference of 0.76%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (90.4% compared to 90.7%, a difference of 0.35%), 2 or more vehicles in household (57.5% compared to 57.2%, a difference of 0.62%), and 4 or more vehicles in household (7.6% compared to 7.6%, a difference of 0.76%).
Immigrants from Oceania vs Chippewa Vehicle Availability
Vehicle Availability MetricImmigrants from OceaniaChippewa
No Vehicles Available
Excellent
9.7%
Exceptional
9.4%
1+ Vehicles Available
Excellent
90.4%
Exceptional
90.7%
2+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
57.5%
Exceptional
57.2%
3+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
21.8%
Exceptional
21.5%
4+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
7.6%
Exceptional
7.6%

Immigrants from Oceania vs Chippewa Education Level

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Oceania and Chippewa communities in the United States are seen in no schooling completed (2.2% compared to 1.6%, a difference of 37.2%), professional degree (4.6% compared to 3.5%, a difference of 31.7%), and master's degree (14.7% compared to 11.4%, a difference of 28.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of ged/equivalency (85.5% compared to 85.2%, a difference of 0.34%), nursery school (97.8% compared to 98.5%, a difference of 0.71%), and kindergarten (97.8% compared to 98.5%, a difference of 0.72%).
Immigrants from Oceania vs Chippewa Education Level
Education Level MetricImmigrants from OceaniaChippewa
No Schooling Completed
Poor
2.2%
Exceptional
1.6%
Nursery School
Poor
97.8%
Exceptional
98.5%
Kindergarten
Poor
97.8%
Exceptional
98.5%
1st Grade
Poor
97.8%
Exceptional
98.5%
2nd Grade
Poor
97.7%
Exceptional
98.4%
3rd Grade
Tragic
97.6%
Exceptional
98.4%
4th Grade
Tragic
97.3%
Exceptional
98.2%
5th Grade
Poor
97.1%
Exceptional
98.1%
6th Grade
Poor
96.8%
Exceptional
97.9%
7th Grade
Tragic
95.7%
Exceptional
97.3%
8th Grade
Tragic
95.3%
Exceptional
97.1%
9th Grade
Poor
94.5%
Exceptional
96.1%
10th Grade
Poor
93.4%
Exceptional
95.0%
11th Grade
Fair
92.2%
Exceptional
93.5%
12th Grade, No Diploma
Fair
90.9%
Good
91.5%
High School Diploma
Fair
88.8%
Excellent
89.7%
GED/Equivalency
Fair
85.5%
Fair
85.2%
College, Under 1 year
Average
65.6%
Tragic
62.6%
College, 1 year or more
Average
59.4%
Tragic
55.7%
Associate's Degree
Fair
45.8%
Tragic
40.7%
Bachelor's Degree
Fair
37.3%
Tragic
30.6%
Master's Degree
Fair
14.7%
Tragic
11.4%
Professional Degree
Good
4.6%
Tragic
3.5%
Doctorate Degree
Good
1.9%
Tragic
1.5%

Immigrants from Oceania vs Chippewa Disability

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Oceania and Chippewa communities in the United States are seen in disability age under 5 (1.2% compared to 1.9%, a difference of 61.8%), disability age 18 to 34 (6.7% compared to 9.0%, a difference of 34.6%), and disability age 35 to 64 (11.4% compared to 15.0%, a difference of 31.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of disability age over 75 (48.0% compared to 48.4%, a difference of 0.87%), cognitive disability (17.6% compared to 18.1%, a difference of 2.8%), and self-care disability (2.5% compared to 2.6%, a difference of 6.0%).
Immigrants from Oceania vs Chippewa Disability
Disability MetricImmigrants from OceaniaChippewa
Disability
Fair
11.8%
Tragic
14.1%
Males
Fair
11.4%
Tragic
14.3%
Females
Good
12.1%
Tragic
14.0%
Age | Under 5 years
Exceptional
1.2%
Tragic
1.9%
Age | 5 to 17 years
Exceptional
5.4%
Tragic
7.1%
Age | 18 to 34 years
Fair
6.7%
Tragic
9.0%
Age | 35 to 64 years
Fair
11.4%
Tragic
15.0%
Age | 65 to 74 years
Poor
24.0%
Tragic
27.8%
Age | Over 75 years
Tragic
48.0%
Tragic
48.4%
Vision
Average
2.2%
Tragic
2.4%
Hearing
Tragic
3.2%
Tragic
4.0%
Cognitive
Tragic
17.6%
Tragic
18.1%
Ambulatory
Good
6.1%
Tragic
7.1%
Self-Care
Fair
2.5%
Tragic
2.6%