Luxembourger vs Ute 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)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 IslanderUgandanUkrainianUruguayanVenezuelanVietnameseWelshWest 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
Ute
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

Ute

Excellent
Fair
9,215
SOCIAL INDEX
89.6/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
27th/ 347
SOCIAL RANK
2,439
SOCIAL INDEX
21.9/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
258th/ 347
SOCIAL RANK

Ute Integration in Luxembourger Communities

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 38,536,708 people shows a mild positive correlation between the proportion of Ute within Luxembourger communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.350. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Luxembourgers within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.207% in Ute. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Luxembourgers corresponds to an increase of 207.0 Ute.
Luxembourger Integration in Ute Communities

Luxembourger vs Ute Income

When considering income, the most significant differences between Luxembourger and Ute communities in the United States are seen in per capita income ($45,663 compared to $36,651, a difference of 24.6%), householder income ages 45 - 64 years ($103,536 compared to $83,937, a difference of 23.4%), and median family income ($106,183 compared to $87,596, a difference of 21.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of householder income under 25 years ($50,379 compared to $49,997, a difference of 0.77%), wage/income gap (27.4% compared to 27.8%, a difference of 1.3%), and median female earnings ($39,891 compared to $34,960, a difference of 14.1%).
Luxembourger vs Ute Income
Income MetricLuxembourgerUte
Per Capita Income
Exceptional
$45,663
Tragic
$36,651
Median Family Income
Excellent
$106,183
Tragic
$87,596
Median Household Income
Good
$86,418
Tragic
$72,402
Median Earnings
Excellent
$47,640
Tragic
$41,051
Median Male Earnings
Excellent
$56,300
Tragic
$48,899
Median Female Earnings
Average
$39,891
Tragic
$34,960
Householder Age | Under 25 years
Tragic
$50,379
Tragic
$49,997
Householder Age | 25 - 44 years
Excellent
$97,237
Tragic
$82,166
Householder Age | 45 - 64 years
Excellent
$103,536
Tragic
$83,937
Householder Age | Over 65 years
Average
$60,967
Tragic
$52,949
Wage/Income Gap
Tragic
27.4%
Tragic
27.8%

Luxembourger vs Ute Poverty

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Luxembourger and Ute communities in the United States are seen in male poverty (9.5% compared to 16.2%, a difference of 70.7%), family poverty (7.2% compared to 12.1%, a difference of 67.0%), and married-couple family poverty (3.9% compared to 6.4%, a difference of 66.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of single father poverty (17.1% compared to 18.5%, a difference of 8.2%), single male poverty (13.4% compared to 15.7%, a difference of 17.4%), and seniors poverty over the age of 75 (10.8% compared to 12.9%, a difference of 19.8%).
Luxembourger vs Ute Poverty
Poverty MetricLuxembourgerUte
Poverty
Exceptional
10.6%
Tragic
16.9%
Families
Exceptional
7.2%
Tragic
12.1%
Males
Exceptional
9.5%
Tragic
16.2%
Females
Exceptional
11.6%
Tragic
17.5%
Females 18 to 24 years
Tragic
20.9%
Tragic
25.4%
Females 25 to 34 years
Exceptional
12.1%
Tragic
17.9%
Children Under 5 years
Exceptional
14.9%
Tragic
23.5%
Children Under 16 years
Exceptional
13.6%
Tragic
21.5%
Boys Under 16 years
Exceptional
13.8%
Tragic
21.6%
Girls Under 16 years
Exceptional
14.3%
Tragic
21.8%
Single Males
Tragic
13.4%
Tragic
15.7%
Single Females
Excellent
20.4%
Tragic
28.4%
Single Fathers
Tragic
17.1%
Tragic
18.5%
Single Mothers
Excellent
28.5%
Tragic
35.7%
Married Couples
Exceptional
3.9%
Tragic
6.4%
Seniors Over 65 years
Exceptional
9.2%
Tragic
12.2%
Seniors Over 75 years
Exceptional
10.8%
Tragic
12.9%
Receiving Food Stamps
Exceptional
9.1%
Tragic
14.7%

Luxembourger vs Ute Unemployment

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Luxembourger and Ute communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among ages 45 to 54 years (4.2% compared to 6.2%, a difference of 46.4%), unemployment among ages 30 to 34 years (4.8% compared to 7.0%, a difference of 46.4%), and male unemployment (4.5% compared to 6.6%, a difference of 46.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among women with children under 6 years (6.6% compared to 6.5%, a difference of 2.4%), unemployment among ages 25 to 29 years (6.2% compared to 6.8%, a difference of 9.8%), and unemployment among seniors over 75 years (7.7% compared to 6.8%, a difference of 13.0%).
Luxembourger vs Ute Unemployment
Unemployment MetricLuxembourgerUte
Unemployment
Exceptional
4.3%
Tragic
6.3%
Males
Exceptional
4.5%
Tragic
6.6%
Females
Exceptional
4.4%
Tragic
6.1%
Youth < 25
Exceptional
10.0%
Tragic
13.3%
Age | 16 to 19 years
Exceptional
15.1%
Tragic
19.6%
Age | 20 to 24 years
Exceptional
9.1%
Tragic
11.2%
Age | 25 to 29 years
Exceptional
6.2%
Poor
6.8%
Age | 30 to 34 years
Exceptional
4.8%
Tragic
7.0%
Age | 35 to 44 years
Exceptional
4.3%
Tragic
5.3%
Age | 45 to 54 years
Exceptional
4.2%
Tragic
6.2%
Age | 55 to 59 years
Exceptional
4.5%
Tragic
5.2%
Age | 60 to 64 years
Exceptional
4.3%
Fair
4.9%
Age | 65 to 74 years
Exceptional
5.2%
Tragic
6.5%
Seniors > 65
Exceptional
4.8%
Tragic
6.3%
Seniors > 75
Exceptional
7.7%
Exceptional
6.8%
Women w/ Children < 6
Exceptional
6.6%
Exceptional
6.5%
Women w/ Children 6 to 17
Exceptional
8.3%
Exceptional
7.0%
Women w/ Children < 18
Exceptional
5.0%
Tragic
5.9%

Luxembourger vs Ute Labor Participation

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Luxembourger and Ute communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (45.3% compared to 37.1%, a difference of 22.1%), in labor force | age 20-64 (81.9% compared to 73.7%, a difference of 11.1%), and in labor force | age 45-54 (85.0% compared to 76.6%, a difference of 10.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 20-24 (79.0% compared to 73.8%, a difference of 7.0%), in labor force | age 25-29 (86.9% compared to 80.8%, a difference of 7.5%), and in labor force | age 35-44 (86.4% compared to 79.4%, a difference of 8.7%).
Luxembourger vs Ute Labor Participation
Labor Participation MetricLuxembourgerUte
In Labor Force | Age > 16
Exceptional
66.7%
Tragic
60.9%
In Labor Force | Age 20-64
Exceptional
81.9%
Tragic
73.7%
In Labor Force | Age 16-19
Exceptional
45.3%
Good
37.1%
In Labor Force | Age 20-24
Exceptional
79.0%
Tragic
73.8%
In Labor Force | Age 25-29
Exceptional
86.9%
Tragic
80.8%
In Labor Force | Age 30-34
Exceptional
86.6%
Tragic
78.9%
In Labor Force | Age 35-44
Exceptional
86.4%
Tragic
79.4%
In Labor Force | Age 45-54
Exceptional
85.0%
Tragic
76.6%

Luxembourger vs Ute Family Structure

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Luxembourger and Ute communities in the United States are seen in single father households (2.2% compared to 3.0%, a difference of 32.8%), single mother households (5.6% compared to 7.1%, a difference of 27.8%), and average family size (3.10 compared to 3.49, a difference of 12.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of family households (63.3% compared to 64.3%, a difference of 1.7%), family households with children (27.0% compared to 28.2%, a difference of 4.2%), and married-couple households (48.5% compared to 44.4%, a difference of 9.1%).
Luxembourger vs Ute Family Structure
Family Structure MetricLuxembourgerUte
Family Households
Tragic
63.3%
Average
64.3%
Family Households with Children
Tragic
27.0%
Exceptional
28.2%
Married-couple Households
Exceptional
48.5%
Tragic
44.4%
Average Family Size
Tragic
3.10
Exceptional
3.49
Single Father Households
Exceptional
2.2%
Tragic
3.0%
Single Mother Households
Exceptional
5.6%
Tragic
7.1%
Currently Married
Exceptional
49.3%
Tragic
43.9%
Divorced or Separated
Exceptional
11.3%
Tragic
12.6%
Births to Unmarried Women
Exceptional
29.4%
Poor
33.0%

Luxembourger vs Ute Vehicle Availability

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Luxembourger and Ute communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (5.4% compared to 11.6%, a difference of 116.5%), 4 or more vehicles in household (6.6% compared to 8.8%, a difference of 32.2%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (20.9% compared to 22.7%, a difference of 8.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 2 or more vehicles in household (59.1% compared to 56.6%, a difference of 4.4%), 1 or more vehicles in household (94.8% compared to 88.7%, a difference of 6.9%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (20.9% compared to 22.7%, a difference of 8.6%).
Luxembourger vs Ute Vehicle Availability
Vehicle Availability MetricLuxembourgerUte
No Vehicles Available
Exceptional
5.4%
Tragic
11.6%
1+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
94.8%
Tragic
88.7%
2+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
59.1%
Exceptional
56.6%
3+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
20.9%
Exceptional
22.7%
4+ Vehicles Available
Excellent
6.6%
Exceptional
8.8%

Luxembourger vs Ute Education Level

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Luxembourger and Ute communities in the United States are seen in no schooling completed (1.6% compared to 2.3%, a difference of 42.3%), master's degree (15.3% compared to 11.7%, a difference of 31.0%), and bachelor's degree (39.8% compared to 30.9%, a difference of 28.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of nursery school (98.5% compared to 98.2%, a difference of 0.29%), kindergarten (98.5% compared to 98.2%, a difference of 0.30%), and 1st grade (98.5% compared to 98.2%, a difference of 0.30%).
Luxembourger vs Ute Education Level
Education Level MetricLuxembourgerUte
No Schooling Completed
Exceptional
1.6%
Tragic
2.3%
Nursery School
Exceptional
98.5%
Exceptional
98.2%
Kindergarten
Exceptional
98.5%
Exceptional
98.2%
1st Grade
Exceptional
98.5%
Exceptional
98.2%
2nd Grade
Exceptional
98.4%
Exceptional
98.1%
3rd Grade
Exceptional
98.3%
Exceptional
98.0%
4th Grade
Exceptional
98.2%
Excellent
97.7%
5th Grade
Exceptional
98.1%
Good
97.4%
6th Grade
Exceptional
97.9%
Good
97.1%
7th Grade
Exceptional
97.2%
Average
96.1%
8th Grade
Exceptional
97.0%
Average
95.8%
9th Grade
Exceptional
96.3%
Good
95.0%
10th Grade
Exceptional
95.4%
Fair
93.4%
11th Grade
Exceptional
94.5%
Tragic
91.1%
12th Grade, No Diploma
Exceptional
93.3%
Tragic
89.0%
High School Diploma
Exceptional
91.7%
Tragic
86.2%
GED/Equivalency
Exceptional
88.6%
Tragic
81.8%
College, Under 1 year
Exceptional
68.2%
Tragic
60.2%
College, 1 year or more
Exceptional
62.1%
Tragic
53.8%
Associate's Degree
Exceptional
48.9%
Tragic
38.6%
Bachelor's Degree
Excellent
39.8%
Tragic
30.9%
Master's Degree
Good
15.3%
Tragic
11.7%
Professional Degree
Good
4.6%
Tragic
4.0%
Doctorate Degree
Excellent
1.9%
Exceptional
2.0%

Luxembourger vs Ute Disability

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Luxembourger and Ute communities in the United States are seen in disability age under 5 (1.3% compared to 0.86%, a difference of 53.0%), disability age 65 to 74 (21.4% compared to 27.3%, a difference of 27.7%), and disability age 35 to 64 (10.6% compared to 13.4%, a difference of 26.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of disability age 18 to 34 (6.9% compared to 7.0%, a difference of 1.6%), male disability (11.1% compared to 11.6%, a difference of 3.8%), and disability age 5 to 17 (5.3% compared to 5.5%, a difference of 4.4%).
Luxembourger vs Ute Disability
Disability MetricLuxembourgerUte
Disability
Exceptional
11.3%
Poor
11.9%
Males
Good
11.1%
Tragic
11.6%
Females
Exceptional
11.6%
Poor
12.4%
Age | Under 5 years
Tragic
1.3%
Exceptional
0.86%
Age | 5 to 17 years
Exceptional
5.3%
Excellent
5.5%
Age | 18 to 34 years
Tragic
6.9%
Tragic
7.0%
Age | 35 to 64 years
Exceptional
10.6%
Tragic
13.4%
Age | 65 to 74 years
Exceptional
21.4%
Tragic
27.3%
Age | Over 75 years
Exceptional
44.8%
Tragic
52.6%
Vision
Exceptional
1.9%
Tragic
2.4%
Hearing
Tragic
3.2%
Tragic
3.5%
Cognitive
Exceptional
16.4%
Average
17.3%
Ambulatory
Exceptional
5.6%
Excellent
6.0%
Self-Care
Exceptional
2.2%
Average
2.5%