Pima vs Chinese Community Comparison
COMPARE
Pima
Chinese
Social Comparison
Social Comparison
Pima
Chinese
1,700
SOCIAL INDEX
14.5/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
291st/ 347
SOCIAL RANK
9,296
SOCIAL INDEX
90.4/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
23rd/ 347
SOCIAL RANK
Chinese Integration in Pima Communities
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 30,836,791 people shows a perfect negative correlation between the proportion of Chinese within Pima communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of -1.000. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Pima within a typical geography, there is a decrease of 0.003% in Chinese. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Pima corresponds to a decrease of 2.9 Chinese.
Pima vs Chinese Income
When considering income, the most significant differences between Pima and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in householder income ages 45 - 64 years ($73,365 compared to $116,156, a difference of 58.3%), median household income ($63,262 compared to $98,496, a difference of 55.7%), and householder income over 65 years ($50,539 compared to $77,465, a difference of 53.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of householder income under 25 years ($51,503 compared to $58,162, a difference of 12.9%), median female earnings ($35,326 compared to $41,461, a difference of 17.4%), and wage/income gap (21.1% compared to 25.9%, a difference of 22.7%).
Income Metric | Pima | Chinese |
Per Capita Income | Tragic $30,644 | Exceptional $46,098 |
Median Family Income | Tragic $77,431 | Exceptional $116,188 |
Median Household Income | Tragic $63,262 | Exceptional $98,496 |
Median Earnings | Tragic $38,285 | Exceptional $48,836 |
Median Male Earnings | Tragic $42,357 | Exceptional $56,872 |
Median Female Earnings | Tragic $35,326 | Exceptional $41,461 |
Householder Age | Under 25 years | Poor $51,503 | Exceptional $58,162 |
Householder Age | 25 - 44 years | Tragic $82,821 | Exceptional $104,264 |
Householder Age | 45 - 64 years | Tragic $73,365 | Exceptional $116,156 |
Householder Age | Over 65 years | Tragic $50,539 | Exceptional $77,465 |
Wage/Income Gap | Exceptional 21.1% | Average 25.9% |
Pima vs Chinese Poverty
When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Pima and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in married-couple family poverty (11.4% compared to 3.6%, a difference of 212.8%), family poverty (18.4% compared to 6.5%, a difference of 182.3%), and seniors poverty over the age of 75 (23.9% compared to 9.1%, a difference of 163.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of single father poverty (14.8% compared to 15.4%, a difference of 4.3%), single mother poverty (38.6% compared to 24.6%, a difference of 56.8%), and female poverty among 18-24 year olds (28.4% compared to 16.2%, a difference of 75.8%).
Poverty Metric | Pima | Chinese |
Poverty | Tragic 21.9% | Exceptional 9.5% |
Families | Tragic 18.4% | Exceptional 6.5% |
Males | Tragic 20.4% | Exceptional 8.7% |
Females | Tragic 23.6% | Exceptional 10.4% |
Females 18 to 24 years | Tragic 28.4% | Exceptional 16.2% |
Females 25 to 34 years | Tragic 25.3% | Exceptional 11.0% |
Children Under 5 years | Tragic 27.4% | Exceptional 13.1% |
Children Under 16 years | Tragic 29.0% | Exceptional 11.9% |
Boys Under 16 years | Tragic 29.7% | Exceptional 11.9% |
Girls Under 16 years | Tragic 28.2% | Exceptional 12.3% |
Single Males | Tragic 20.2% | Exceptional 11.0% |
Single Females | Tragic 30.3% | Exceptional 16.1% |
Single Fathers | Exceptional 14.8% | Exceptional 15.4% |
Single Mothers | Tragic 38.6% | Exceptional 24.6% |
Married Couples | Tragic 11.4% | Exceptional 3.6% |
Seniors Over 65 years | Tragic 19.8% | Exceptional 8.3% |
Seniors Over 75 years | Tragic 23.9% | Exceptional 9.1% |
Receiving Food Stamps | Tragic 19.0% | Exceptional 9.8% |
Pima vs Chinese Unemployment
When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Pima and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among ages 35 to 44 years (11.8% compared to 4.3%, a difference of 173.7%), unemployment among women with children under 18 years (11.7% compared to 4.9%, a difference of 137.3%), and female unemployment (9.3% compared to 4.5%, a difference of 108.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among ages 60 to 64 years (4.8% compared to 4.0%, a difference of 19.5%), unemployment among ages 16 to 19 years (23.1% compared to 16.0%, a difference of 44.2%), and unemployment among ages 65 to 74 years (6.6% compared to 4.4%, a difference of 48.7%).
Unemployment Metric | Pima | Chinese |
Unemployment | Tragic 8.2% | Exceptional 4.7% |
Males | Tragic 8.3% | Exceptional 4.9% |
Females | Tragic 9.3% | Exceptional 4.5% |
Youth < 25 | Tragic 16.2% | Exceptional 10.7% |
Age | 16 to 19 years | Tragic 23.1% | Exceptional 16.0% |
Age | 20 to 24 years | Tragic 14.2% | Exceptional 9.4% |
Age | 25 to 29 years | Tragic 11.8% | Exceptional 6.1% |
Age | 30 to 34 years | Tragic 9.6% | Exceptional 5.1% |
Age | 35 to 44 years | Tragic 11.8% | Exceptional 4.3% |
Age | 45 to 54 years | Tragic 6.4% | Exceptional 4.0% |
Age | 55 to 59 years | Tragic 6.6% | Exceptional 4.4% |
Age | 60 to 64 years | Excellent 4.8% | Exceptional 4.0% |
Age | 65 to 74 years | Tragic 6.6% | Exceptional 4.4% |
Seniors > 65 | Tragic 6.3% | Exceptional 4.2% |
Seniors > 75 | Tragic 9.2% | Exceptional 5.9% |
Women w/ Children < 6 | Tragic 13.4% | Exceptional 6.8% |
Women w/ Children 6 to 17 | Tragic 18.9% | Tragic 9.3% |
Women w/ Children < 18 | Tragic 11.7% | Exceptional 4.9% |
Pima vs Chinese Labor Participation
When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Pima and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 20-64 (69.0% compared to 80.7%, a difference of 16.8%), in labor force | age 45-54 (72.8% compared to 84.1%, a difference of 15.5%), and in labor force | age 35-44 (74.8% compared to 85.1%, a difference of 13.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 30-34 (79.0% compared to 85.0%, a difference of 7.5%), in labor force | age 20-24 (69.0% compared to 77.3%, a difference of 12.0%), and in labor force | age > 16 (57.4% compared to 64.7%, a difference of 12.6%).
Labor Participation Metric | Pima | Chinese |
In Labor Force | Age > 16 | Tragic 57.4% | Tragic 64.7% |
In Labor Force | Age 20-64 | Tragic 69.0% | Exceptional 80.7% |
In Labor Force | Age 16-19 | Tragic 34.1% | Exceptional 38.6% |
In Labor Force | Age 20-24 | Tragic 69.0% | Exceptional 77.3% |
In Labor Force | Age 25-29 | Tragic 74.3% | Poor 84.3% |
In Labor Force | Age 30-34 | Tragic 79.0% | Excellent 85.0% |
In Labor Force | Age 35-44 | Tragic 74.8% | Exceptional 85.1% |
In Labor Force | Age 45-54 | Tragic 72.8% | Exceptional 84.1% |
Pima vs Chinese Family Structure
When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Pima and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in single father households (4.2% compared to 2.0%, a difference of 111.7%), births to unmarried women (51.5% compared to 30.2%, a difference of 70.2%), and single mother households (8.3% compared to 5.2%, a difference of 60.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of family households (65.9% compared to 68.1%, a difference of 3.3%), family households with children (27.1% compared to 26.0%, a difference of 4.2%), and average family size (3.75 compared to 3.34, a difference of 12.2%).
Family Structure Metric | Pima | Chinese |
Family Households | Exceptional 65.9% | Exceptional 68.1% |
Family Households with Children | Tragic 27.1% | Tragic 26.0% |
Married-couple Households | Tragic 35.6% | Exceptional 50.4% |
Average Family Size | Exceptional 3.75 | Exceptional 3.34 |
Single Father Households | Tragic 4.2% | Exceptional 2.0% |
Single Mother Households | Tragic 8.3% | Exceptional 5.2% |
Currently Married | Tragic 35.9% | Exceptional 49.5% |
Divorced or Separated | Tragic 12.9% | Exceptional 11.2% |
Births to Unmarried Women | Tragic 51.5% | Excellent 30.2% |
Pima vs Chinese Vehicle Availability
When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Pima and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (14.1% compared to 8.2%, a difference of 71.9%), 2 or more vehicles in household (52.0% compared to 60.1%, a difference of 15.5%), and 4 or more vehicles in household (7.9% compared to 8.8%, a difference of 12.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (86.3% compared to 91.9%, a difference of 6.5%), 3 or more vehicles in household (22.0% compared to 23.9%, a difference of 8.3%), and 4 or more vehicles in household (7.9% compared to 8.8%, a difference of 12.5%).
Vehicle Availability Metric | Pima | Chinese |
No Vehicles Available | Tragic 14.1% | Exceptional 8.2% |
1+ Vehicles Available | Tragic 86.3% | Exceptional 91.9% |
2+ Vehicles Available | Tragic 52.0% | Exceptional 60.1% |
3+ Vehicles Available | Exceptional 22.0% | Exceptional 23.9% |
4+ Vehicles Available | Exceptional 7.9% | Exceptional 8.8% |
Pima vs Chinese Education Level
When considering education level, the most significant differences between Pima and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in bachelor's degree (23.2% compared to 38.5%, a difference of 65.7%), associate's degree (30.2% compared to 48.5%, a difference of 60.6%), and master's degree (9.2% compared to 14.6%, a difference of 57.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of kindergarten (98.2% compared to 98.5%, a difference of 0.32%), 1st grade (98.2% compared to 98.5%, a difference of 0.32%), and nursery school (98.2% compared to 98.6%, a difference of 0.33%).
Education Level Metric | Pima | Chinese |
No Schooling Completed | Average 2.1% | Exceptional 1.5% |
Nursery School | Exceptional 98.2% | Exceptional 98.6% |
Kindergarten | Exceptional 98.2% | Exceptional 98.5% |
1st Grade | Exceptional 98.2% | Exceptional 98.5% |
2nd Grade | Exceptional 98.2% | Exceptional 98.5% |
3rd Grade | Exceptional 98.0% | Exceptional 98.4% |
4th Grade | Exceptional 97.7% | Exceptional 98.3% |
5th Grade | Exceptional 97.6% | Exceptional 98.1% |
6th Grade | Excellent 97.2% | Exceptional 97.9% |
7th Grade | Good 96.1% | Exceptional 97.1% |
8th Grade | Fair 95.6% | Exceptional 96.9% |
9th Grade | Tragic 93.9% | Exceptional 96.3% |
10th Grade | Tragic 91.2% | Exceptional 95.5% |
11th Grade | Tragic 88.3% | Exceptional 94.6% |
12th Grade, No Diploma | Tragic 84.6% | Exceptional 93.6% |
High School Diploma | Tragic 81.6% | Exceptional 92.0% |
GED/Equivalency | Tragic 76.4% | Exceptional 89.0% |
College, Under 1 year | Tragic 51.4% | Exceptional 68.3% |
College, 1 year or more | Tragic 45.6% | Exceptional 62.2% |
Associate's Degree | Tragic 30.2% | Exceptional 48.5% |
Bachelor's Degree | Tragic 23.2% | Good 38.5% |
Master's Degree | Tragic 9.2% | Fair 14.6% |
Professional Degree | Tragic 3.3% | Average 4.5% |
Doctorate Degree | Tragic 1.3% | Fair 1.8% |
Pima vs Chinese Disability
When considering disability, the most significant differences between Pima and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in disability age 65 to 74 (38.6% compared to 21.7%, a difference of 77.9%), vision disability (3.3% compared to 2.0%, a difference of 62.9%), and disability age 35 to 64 (16.1% compared to 10.3%, a difference of 56.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of hearing disability (3.7% compared to 3.7%, a difference of 0.90%), male disability (12.8% compared to 12.1%, a difference of 6.4%), and disability age under 5 (1.1% compared to 1.1%, a difference of 7.5%).
Disability Metric | Pima | Chinese |
Disability | Tragic 13.7% | Tragic 12.2% |
Males | Tragic 12.8% | Tragic 12.1% |
Females | Tragic 14.8% | Fair 12.3% |
Age | Under 5 years | Exceptional 1.1% | Exceptional 1.1% |
Age | 5 to 17 years | Tragic 6.2% | Exceptional 4.7% |
Age | 18 to 34 years | Tragic 7.7% | Exceptional 6.3% |
Age | 35 to 64 years | Tragic 16.1% | Exceptional 10.3% |
Age | 65 to 74 years | Tragic 38.6% | Exceptional 21.7% |
Age | Over 75 years | Tragic 55.8% | Tragic 48.7% |
Vision | Tragic 3.3% | Exceptional 2.0% |
Hearing | Tragic 3.7% | Tragic 3.7% |
Cognitive | Tragic 18.8% | Exceptional 15.9% |
Ambulatory | Tragic 8.2% | Tragic 6.5% |
Self-Care | Tragic 2.8% | Tragic 2.6% |