Luxembourger vs Navajo Community Comparison

COMPARE

Luxembourger
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 HawaiianNepaleseNew 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
Navajo
Race
Ancestry
AfghanAfricanAlaska NativeAlaskan AthabascanAlbanianAleutAlsatianAmericanApacheArabArapahoArgentineanArmenianAssyrian/Chaldean/SyriacAustralianAustrianBahamianBangladeshiBarbadianBasqueBelgianBelizeanBermudanBhutaneseBlackfeetBolivianBrazilianBritishBritish West IndianBulgarianBurmeseCajunCambodianCanadianCape VerdeanCarpatho RusynCelticCentral AmericanCentral American IndianCherokeeCheyenneChickasawChileanChineseChippewaChoctawColombianColvilleComancheCosta RicanCreeCreekCroatianCrowCubanCypriotCzechCzechoslovakianDanishDelawareDominicanDutchDutch West IndianEastern EuropeanEcuadorianEgyptianEnglishEstonianEthiopianEuropeanFijianFilipinoFinnishFrenchFrench American IndianFrench CanadianGermanGerman RussianGhanaianGreekGuamanian/ChamorroGuatemalanGuyaneseHaitianHmongHonduranHopiHoumaHungarianIcelanderIndian (Asian)IndonesianInupiatIranianIraqiIrishIroquoisIsraeliItalianJamaicanJapaneseJordanianKenyanKiowaKoreanLaotianLatvianLebaneseLiberianLithuanianLumbeeMacedonianMalaysianMalteseMenomineeMexicanMexican 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

Luxembourgers

Navajo

Excellent
Poor
9,215
SOCIAL INDEX
89.6/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
27th/ 347
SOCIAL RANK
1,296
SOCIAL INDEX
10.5/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
316th/ 347
SOCIAL RANK

Navajo Integration in Luxembourger Communities

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 95,468,172 people shows a strong positive correlation between the proportion of Navajo within Luxembourger communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.714. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Luxembourgers within a typical geography, there is an increase of 4.129% in Navajo. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Luxembourgers corresponds to an increase of 4,128.9 Navajo.
Luxembourger Integration in Navajo Communities

Luxembourger vs Navajo Income

When considering income, the most significant differences between Luxembourger and Navajo communities in the United States are seen in per capita income ($45,663 compared to $29,031, a difference of 57.3%), median family income ($106,183 compared to $70,989, a difference of 49.6%), and householder income ages 45 - 64 years ($103,536 compared to $69,759, a difference of 48.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of householder income under 25 years ($50,379 compared to $42,380, a difference of 18.9%), median female earnings ($39,891 compared to $33,046, a difference of 20.7%), and wage/income gap (27.4% compared to 22.4%, a difference of 22.7%).
Luxembourger vs Navajo Income
Income MetricLuxembourgerNavajo
Per Capita Income
Exceptional
$45,663
Tragic
$29,031
Median Family Income
Excellent
$106,183
Tragic
$70,989
Median Household Income
Good
$86,418
Tragic
$59,159
Median Earnings
Excellent
$47,640
Tragic
$36,999
Median Male Earnings
Excellent
$56,300
Tragic
$42,098
Median Female Earnings
Average
$39,891
Tragic
$33,046
Householder Age | Under 25 years
Tragic
$50,379
Tragic
$42,380
Householder Age | 25 - 44 years
Excellent
$97,237
Tragic
$66,529
Householder Age | 45 - 64 years
Excellent
$103,536
Tragic
$69,759
Householder Age | Over 65 years
Average
$60,967
Tragic
$47,722
Wage/Income Gap
Tragic
27.4%
Exceptional
22.4%

Luxembourger vs Navajo Poverty

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Luxembourger and Navajo communities in the United States are seen in married-couple family poverty (3.9% compared to 11.9%, a difference of 205.6%), family poverty (7.2% compared to 18.8%, a difference of 160.5%), and male poverty (9.5% compared to 22.3%, a difference of 134.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of single mother poverty (28.5% compared to 40.2%, a difference of 41.0%), female poverty among 18-24 year olds (20.9% compared to 30.3%, a difference of 45.2%), and single female poverty (20.4% compared to 31.7%, a difference of 54.8%).
Luxembourger vs Navajo Poverty
Poverty MetricLuxembourgerNavajo
Poverty
Exceptional
10.6%
Tragic
23.1%
Families
Exceptional
7.2%
Tragic
18.8%
Males
Exceptional
9.5%
Tragic
22.3%
Females
Exceptional
11.6%
Tragic
23.9%
Females 18 to 24 years
Tragic
20.9%
Tragic
30.3%
Females 25 to 34 years
Exceptional
12.1%
Tragic
23.3%
Children Under 5 years
Exceptional
14.9%
Tragic
31.6%
Children Under 16 years
Exceptional
13.6%
Tragic
30.2%
Boys Under 16 years
Exceptional
13.8%
Tragic
30.3%
Girls Under 16 years
Exceptional
14.3%
Tragic
30.5%
Single Males
Tragic
13.4%
Tragic
25.3%
Single Females
Excellent
20.4%
Tragic
31.7%
Single Fathers
Tragic
17.1%
Tragic
29.2%
Single Mothers
Excellent
28.5%
Tragic
40.2%
Married Couples
Exceptional
3.9%
Tragic
11.9%
Seniors Over 65 years
Exceptional
9.2%
Tragic
17.5%
Seniors Over 75 years
Exceptional
10.8%
Tragic
19.4%
Receiving Food Stamps
Exceptional
9.1%
Tragic
21.1%

Luxembourger vs Navajo Unemployment

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Luxembourger and Navajo communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among ages 30 to 34 years (4.8% compared to 10.6%, a difference of 119.4%), male unemployment (4.5% compared to 9.8%, a difference of 116.7%), and unemployment among ages 35 to 44 years (4.3% compared to 9.3%, a difference of 116.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among seniors over 75 years (7.7% compared to 9.1%, a difference of 17.9%), unemployment among ages 65 to 74 years (5.2% compared to 6.9%, a difference of 33.2%), and unemployment among seniors over 65 years (4.8% compared to 6.7%, a difference of 38.3%).
Luxembourger vs Navajo Unemployment
Unemployment MetricLuxembourgerNavajo
Unemployment
Exceptional
4.3%
Tragic
8.4%
Males
Exceptional
4.5%
Tragic
9.8%
Females
Exceptional
4.4%
Tragic
7.3%
Youth < 25
Exceptional
10.0%
Tragic
18.6%
Age | 16 to 19 years
Exceptional
15.1%
Tragic
29.0%
Age | 20 to 24 years
Exceptional
9.1%
Tragic
16.1%
Age | 25 to 29 years
Exceptional
6.2%
Tragic
12.2%
Age | 30 to 34 years
Exceptional
4.8%
Tragic
10.6%
Age | 35 to 44 years
Exceptional
4.3%
Tragic
9.3%
Age | 45 to 54 years
Exceptional
4.2%
Tragic
6.7%
Age | 55 to 59 years
Exceptional
4.5%
Tragic
6.7%
Age | 60 to 64 years
Exceptional
4.3%
Tragic
6.3%
Age | 65 to 74 years
Exceptional
5.2%
Tragic
6.9%
Seniors > 65
Exceptional
4.8%
Tragic
6.7%
Seniors > 75
Exceptional
7.7%
Tragic
9.1%
Women w/ Children < 6
Exceptional
6.6%
Tragic
13.5%
Women w/ Children 6 to 17
Exceptional
8.3%
Tragic
14.2%
Women w/ Children < 18
Exceptional
5.0%
Tragic
8.2%

Luxembourger vs Navajo Labor Participation

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Luxembourger and Navajo communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (45.3% compared to 32.1%, a difference of 41.2%), in labor force | age 20-24 (79.0% compared to 64.8%, a difference of 21.8%), and in labor force | age 20-64 (81.9% compared to 69.2%, a difference of 18.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 25-29 (86.9% compared to 74.6%, a difference of 16.4%), in labor force | age 45-54 (85.0% compared to 72.8%, a difference of 16.8%), and in labor force | age 35-44 (86.4% compared to 73.8%, a difference of 17.0%).
Luxembourger vs Navajo Labor Participation
Labor Participation MetricLuxembourgerNavajo
In Labor Force | Age > 16
Exceptional
66.7%
Tragic
56.6%
In Labor Force | Age 20-64
Exceptional
81.9%
Tragic
69.2%
In Labor Force | Age 16-19
Exceptional
45.3%
Tragic
32.1%
In Labor Force | Age 20-24
Exceptional
79.0%
Tragic
64.8%
In Labor Force | Age 25-29
Exceptional
86.9%
Tragic
74.6%
In Labor Force | Age 30-34
Exceptional
86.6%
Tragic
73.8%
In Labor Force | Age 35-44
Exceptional
86.4%
Tragic
73.8%
In Labor Force | Age 45-54
Exceptional
85.0%
Tragic
72.8%

Luxembourger vs Navajo Family Structure

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Luxembourger and Navajo communities in the United States are seen in births to unmarried women (29.4% compared to 51.5%, a difference of 75.0%), single mother households (5.6% compared to 8.8%, a difference of 59.1%), and single father households (2.2% compared to 3.2%, a difference of 42.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of family households with children (27.0% compared to 26.9%, a difference of 0.31%), family households (63.3% compared to 66.4%, a difference of 4.9%), and divorced or separated (11.3% compared to 12.0%, a difference of 5.7%).
Luxembourger vs Navajo Family Structure
Family Structure MetricLuxembourgerNavajo
Family Households
Tragic
63.3%
Exceptional
66.4%
Family Households with Children
Tragic
27.0%
Tragic
26.9%
Married-couple Households
Exceptional
48.5%
Tragic
40.1%
Average Family Size
Tragic
3.10
Exceptional
3.65
Single Father Households
Exceptional
2.2%
Tragic
3.2%
Single Mother Households
Exceptional
5.6%
Tragic
8.8%
Currently Married
Exceptional
49.3%
Tragic
39.0%
Divorced or Separated
Exceptional
11.3%
Good
12.0%
Births to Unmarried Women
Exceptional
29.4%
Tragic
51.5%

Luxembourger vs Navajo Vehicle Availability

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Luxembourger and Navajo communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (5.4% compared to 9.4%, a difference of 76.0%), 4 or more vehicles in household (6.6% compared to 8.2%, a difference of 24.2%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (20.9% compared to 22.3%, a difference of 6.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (94.8% compared to 90.8%, a difference of 4.4%), 2 or more vehicles in household (59.1% compared to 55.3%, a difference of 6.7%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (20.9% compared to 22.3%, a difference of 6.8%).
Luxembourger vs Navajo Vehicle Availability
Vehicle Availability MetricLuxembourgerNavajo
No Vehicles Available
Exceptional
5.4%
Exceptional
9.4%
1+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
94.8%
Exceptional
90.8%
2+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
59.1%
Average
55.3%
3+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
20.9%
Exceptional
22.3%
4+ Vehicles Available
Excellent
6.6%
Exceptional
8.2%

Luxembourger vs Navajo Education Level

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Luxembourger and Navajo communities in the United States are seen in bachelor's degree (39.8% compared to 23.6%, a difference of 68.4%), master's degree (15.3% compared to 9.4%, a difference of 62.8%), and professional degree (4.6% compared to 2.9%, a difference of 60.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of kindergarten (98.5% compared to 98.0%, a difference of 0.53%), 1st grade (98.5% compared to 97.9%, a difference of 0.53%), and nursery school (98.5% compared to 98.0%, a difference of 0.54%).
Luxembourger vs Navajo Education Level
Education Level MetricLuxembourgerNavajo
No Schooling Completed
Exceptional
1.6%
Fair
2.1%
Nursery School
Exceptional
98.5%
Average
98.0%
Kindergarten
Exceptional
98.5%
Average
98.0%
1st Grade
Exceptional
98.5%
Average
97.9%
2nd Grade
Exceptional
98.4%
Average
97.9%
3rd Grade
Exceptional
98.3%
Average
97.8%
4th Grade
Exceptional
98.2%
Fair
97.4%
5th Grade
Exceptional
98.1%
Fair
97.2%
6th Grade
Exceptional
97.9%
Tragic
96.8%
7th Grade
Exceptional
97.2%
Poor
95.8%
8th Grade
Exceptional
97.0%
Tragic
95.3%
9th Grade
Exceptional
96.3%
Tragic
93.9%
10th Grade
Exceptional
95.4%
Tragic
92.3%
11th Grade
Exceptional
94.5%
Tragic
90.0%
12th Grade, No Diploma
Exceptional
93.3%
Tragic
87.1%
High School Diploma
Exceptional
91.7%
Tragic
85.2%
GED/Equivalency
Exceptional
88.6%
Tragic
81.5%
College, Under 1 year
Exceptional
68.2%
Tragic
56.3%
College, 1 year or more
Exceptional
62.1%
Tragic
50.8%
Associate's Degree
Exceptional
48.9%
Tragic
32.6%
Bachelor's Degree
Excellent
39.8%
Tragic
23.6%
Master's Degree
Good
15.3%
Tragic
9.4%
Professional Degree
Good
4.6%
Tragic
2.9%
Doctorate Degree
Excellent
1.9%
Tragic
1.4%

Luxembourger vs Navajo Disability

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Luxembourger and Navajo communities in the United States are seen in vision disability (1.9% compared to 3.1%, a difference of 62.2%), disability age 65 to 74 (21.4% compared to 33.3%, a difference of 55.8%), and disability age 35 to 64 (10.6% compared to 15.5%, a difference of 46.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of disability age 5 to 17 (5.3% compared to 5.4%, a difference of 3.3%), cognitive disability (16.4% compared to 18.8%, a difference of 14.5%), and disability age 18 to 34 (6.9% compared to 8.1%, a difference of 18.0%).
Luxembourger vs Navajo Disability
Disability MetricLuxembourgerNavajo
Disability
Exceptional
11.3%
Tragic
14.3%
Males
Good
11.1%
Tragic
14.4%
Females
Exceptional
11.6%
Tragic
14.2%
Age | Under 5 years
Tragic
1.3%
Tragic
1.6%
Age | 5 to 17 years
Exceptional
5.3%
Exceptional
5.4%
Age | 18 to 34 years
Tragic
6.9%
Tragic
8.1%
Age | 35 to 64 years
Exceptional
10.6%
Tragic
15.5%
Age | 65 to 74 years
Exceptional
21.4%
Tragic
33.3%
Age | Over 75 years
Exceptional
44.8%
Tragic
58.3%
Vision
Exceptional
1.9%
Tragic
3.1%
Hearing
Tragic
3.2%
Tragic
4.6%
Cognitive
Exceptional
16.4%
Tragic
18.8%
Ambulatory
Exceptional
5.6%
Tragic
7.5%
Self-Care
Exceptional
2.2%
Tragic
2.9%