Romanian vs Iroquois Community Comparison

COMPARE

Romanian
Race
Ancestry
AfghanAfricanAlaska NativeAlaskan AthabascanAlbanianAleutAlsatianAmericanApacheArabArapahoArgentineanArmenianAssyrian/Chaldean/SyriacAustralianAustrianBahamianBangladeshiBarbadianBasqueBelgianBelizeanBermudanBhutaneseBlackfeetBolivianBrazilianBritishBritish West IndianBulgarianBurmeseCajunCambodianCanadianCape VerdeanCarpatho RusynCelticCentral AmericanCentral American IndianCherokeeCheyenneChickasawChileanChineseChippewaChoctawColombianColvilleComancheCosta RicanCreeCreekCroatianCrowCubanCypriotCzechCzechoslovakianDanishDelawareDominicanDutchDutch West IndianEastern EuropeanEcuadorianEgyptianEnglishEstonianEthiopianEuropeanFijianFilipinoFinnishFrenchFrench American IndianFrench CanadianGermanGerman RussianGhanaianGreekGuamanian/ChamorroGuatemalanGuyaneseHaitianHmongHonduranHopiHoumaHungarianIcelanderIndian (Asian)IndonesianInupiatIranianIraqiIrishIsraeliItalianJamaicanJapaneseJordanianKenyanKiowaKoreanLaotianLatvianLebaneseLiberianLithuanianLumbeeLuxembourgerMacedonianMalaysianMalteseMarshalleseMenomineeMexicanMexican 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
Iroquois
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 SalishRussianSalvadoranSamoanScandinavianScotch-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

Romanians

Iroquois

Excellent
Fair
9,022
SOCIAL INDEX
87.7/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
35th/ 347
SOCIAL RANK
2,526
SOCIAL INDEX
22.8/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
253rd/ 347
SOCIAL RANK

Iroquois Integration in Romanian Communities

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 173,986,838 people shows a moderate positive correlation between the proportion of Iroquois within Romanian communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.466. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Romanians within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.059% in Iroquois. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Romanians corresponds to an increase of 58.8 Iroquois.
Romanian Integration in Iroquois Communities

Romanian vs Iroquois Income

When considering income, the most significant differences between Romanian and Iroquois communities in the United States are seen in householder income ages 45 - 64 years ($108,609 compared to $87,255, a difference of 24.5%), per capita income ($48,445 compared to $39,104, a difference of 23.9%), and median household income ($91,994 compared to $74,279, a difference of 23.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of wage/income gap (28.0% compared to 25.1%, a difference of 11.5%), householder income under 25 years ($53,632 compared to $47,380, a difference of 13.2%), and median female earnings ($41,663 compared to $36,408, a difference of 14.4%).
Romanian vs Iroquois Income
Income MetricRomanianIroquois
Per Capita Income
Exceptional
$48,445
Tragic
$39,104
Median Family Income
Exceptional
$111,243
Tragic
$90,543
Median Household Income
Exceptional
$91,994
Tragic
$74,279
Median Earnings
Exceptional
$50,244
Tragic
$42,430
Median Male Earnings
Exceptional
$60,063
Tragic
$49,374
Median Female Earnings
Exceptional
$41,663
Tragic
$36,408
Householder Age | Under 25 years
Exceptional
$53,632
Tragic
$47,380
Householder Age | 25 - 44 years
Exceptional
$102,544
Tragic
$83,682
Householder Age | 45 - 64 years
Exceptional
$108,609
Tragic
$87,255
Householder Age | Over 65 years
Exceptional
$64,142
Tragic
$53,737
Wage/Income Gap
Tragic
28.0%
Excellent
25.1%

Romanian vs Iroquois Poverty

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Romanian and Iroquois communities in the United States are seen in child poverty under the age of 5 (16.0% compared to 22.0%, a difference of 37.7%), female poverty among 25-34 year olds (12.8% compared to 17.5%, a difference of 36.2%), and child poverty among girls under 16 (15.0% compared to 20.4%, a difference of 35.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of single father poverty (16.5% compared to 17.7%, a difference of 7.2%), married-couple family poverty (4.8% compared to 5.5%, a difference of 13.8%), and single male poverty (12.5% compared to 14.5%, a difference of 16.0%).
Romanian vs Iroquois Poverty
Poverty MetricRomanianIroquois
Poverty
Exceptional
11.4%
Tragic
14.5%
Families
Exceptional
8.2%
Tragic
10.7%
Males
Exceptional
10.5%
Tragic
13.2%
Females
Exceptional
12.5%
Tragic
15.8%
Females 18 to 24 years
Exceptional
19.0%
Tragic
22.9%
Females 25 to 34 years
Exceptional
12.8%
Tragic
17.5%
Children Under 5 years
Exceptional
16.0%
Tragic
22.0%
Children Under 16 years
Exceptional
14.8%
Tragic
19.9%
Boys Under 16 years
Exceptional
15.0%
Tragic
19.6%
Girls Under 16 years
Exceptional
15.0%
Tragic
20.4%
Single Males
Excellent
12.5%
Tragic
14.5%
Single Females
Exceptional
19.6%
Tragic
25.7%
Single Fathers
Fair
16.5%
Tragic
17.7%
Single Mothers
Exceptional
27.8%
Tragic
34.8%
Married Couples
Exceptional
4.8%
Poor
5.5%
Seniors Over 65 years
Exceptional
10.1%
Tragic
11.9%
Seniors Over 75 years
Exceptional
11.6%
Tragic
14.0%
Receiving Food Stamps
Exceptional
10.4%
Tragic
13.5%

Romanian vs Iroquois Unemployment

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Romanian and Iroquois communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among women with children under 6 years (7.2% compared to 8.7%, a difference of 21.9%), unemployment among ages 45 to 54 years (4.4% compared to 5.1%, a difference of 17.2%), and unemployment among ages 25 to 29 years (6.6% compared to 7.5%, a difference of 14.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among ages 60 to 64 years (4.7% compared to 4.7%, a difference of 0.59%), unemployment among ages 20 to 24 years (10.2% compared to 10.1%, a difference of 0.95%), and unemployment among ages 65 to 74 years (5.2% compared to 5.1%, a difference of 1.1%).
Romanian vs Iroquois Unemployment
Unemployment MetricRomanianIroquois
Unemployment
Exceptional
5.0%
Poor
5.4%
Males
Excellent
5.1%
Tragic
5.7%
Females
Exceptional
5.0%
Fair
5.4%
Youth < 25
Excellent
11.4%
Exceptional
11.3%
Age | 16 to 19 years
Good
17.3%
Average
17.6%
Age | 20 to 24 years
Excellent
10.2%
Exceptional
10.1%
Age | 25 to 29 years
Good
6.6%
Tragic
7.5%
Age | 30 to 34 years
Excellent
5.3%
Tragic
5.9%
Age | 35 to 44 years
Exceptional
4.5%
Tragic
5.1%
Age | 45 to 54 years
Exceptional
4.4%
Tragic
5.1%
Age | 55 to 59 years
Excellent
4.7%
Fair
4.9%
Age | 60 to 64 years
Exceptional
4.7%
Exceptional
4.7%
Age | 65 to 74 years
Exceptional
5.2%
Exceptional
5.1%
Seniors > 65
Exceptional
5.0%
Exceptional
4.9%
Seniors > 75
Poor
9.0%
Tragic
9.3%
Women w/ Children < 6
Exceptional
7.2%
Tragic
8.7%
Women w/ Children 6 to 17
Exceptional
8.6%
Tragic
9.2%
Women w/ Children < 18
Exceptional
5.2%
Tragic
5.7%

Romanian vs Iroquois Labor Participation

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Romanian and Iroquois communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (37.5% compared to 39.9%, a difference of 6.7%), in labor force | age 30-34 (84.8% compared to 81.9%, a difference of 3.6%), and in labor force | age 20-64 (79.8% compared to 77.5%, a difference of 2.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 20-24 (75.5% compared to 75.6%, a difference of 0.16%), in labor force | age 35-44 (84.5% compared to 83.5%, a difference of 1.2%), and in labor force | age 25-29 (84.8% compared to 83.8%, a difference of 1.3%).
Romanian vs Iroquois Labor Participation
Labor Participation MetricRomanianIroquois
In Labor Force | Age > 16
Fair
65.0%
Tragic
63.2%
In Labor Force | Age 20-64
Good
79.8%
Tragic
77.5%
In Labor Force | Age 16-19
Excellent
37.5%
Exceptional
39.9%
In Labor Force | Age 20-24
Excellent
75.5%
Excellent
75.6%
In Labor Force | Age 25-29
Good
84.8%
Tragic
83.8%
In Labor Force | Age 30-34
Good
84.8%
Tragic
81.9%
In Labor Force | Age 35-44
Good
84.5%
Tragic
83.5%
In Labor Force | Age 45-54
Good
83.0%
Tragic
80.6%

Romanian vs Iroquois Family Structure

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Romanian and Iroquois communities in the United States are seen in births to unmarried women (28.7% compared to 38.2%, a difference of 32.9%), single mother households (5.6% compared to 7.0%, a difference of 23.7%), and single father households (2.1% compared to 2.6%, a difference of 22.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of average family size (3.18 compared to 3.16, a difference of 0.71%), family households (64.5% compared to 62.2%, a difference of 3.7%), and family households with children (27.6% compared to 26.1%, a difference of 5.9%).
Romanian vs Iroquois Family Structure
Family Structure MetricRomanianIroquois
Family Households
Good
64.5%
Tragic
62.2%
Family Households with Children
Good
27.6%
Tragic
26.1%
Married-couple Households
Exceptional
48.4%
Tragic
43.7%
Average Family Size
Tragic
3.18
Tragic
3.16
Single Father Households
Exceptional
2.1%
Tragic
2.6%
Single Mother Households
Exceptional
5.6%
Tragic
7.0%
Currently Married
Exceptional
48.4%
Tragic
44.7%
Divorced or Separated
Exceptional
11.8%
Tragic
12.9%
Births to Unmarried Women
Exceptional
28.7%
Tragic
38.2%

Romanian vs Iroquois Vehicle Availability

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Romanian and Iroquois communities in the United States are seen in 4 or more vehicles in household (6.2% compared to 6.5%, a difference of 4.3%), 2 or more vehicles in household (55.5% compared to 54.7%, a difference of 1.5%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (19.3% compared to 19.4%, a difference of 0.70%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (89.2% compared to 89.2%, a difference of 0.040%), no vehicles in household (10.9% compared to 10.9%, a difference of 0.070%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (19.3% compared to 19.4%, a difference of 0.70%).
Romanian vs Iroquois Vehicle Availability
Vehicle Availability MetricRomanianIroquois
No Vehicles Available
Poor
10.9%
Poor
10.9%
1+ Vehicles Available
Poor
89.2%
Poor
89.2%
2+ Vehicles Available
Average
55.5%
Fair
54.7%
3+ Vehicles Available
Fair
19.3%
Average
19.4%
4+ Vehicles Available
Fair
6.2%
Good
6.5%

Romanian vs Iroquois Education Level

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Romanian and Iroquois communities in the United States are seen in professional degree (5.3% compared to 3.7%, a difference of 42.9%), master's degree (17.2% compared to 12.9%, a difference of 33.2%), and doctorate degree (2.1% compared to 1.6%, a difference of 31.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1st grade (98.2% compared to 98.1%, a difference of 0.080%), nursery school (98.3% compared to 98.2%, a difference of 0.090%), and kindergarten (98.2% compared to 98.2%, a difference of 0.090%).
Romanian vs Iroquois Education Level
Education Level MetricRomanianIroquois
No Schooling Completed
Exceptional
1.8%
Exceptional
1.9%
Nursery School
Exceptional
98.3%
Exceptional
98.2%
Kindergarten
Exceptional
98.2%
Exceptional
98.2%
1st Grade
Exceptional
98.2%
Exceptional
98.1%
2nd Grade
Exceptional
98.2%
Exceptional
98.1%
3rd Grade
Exceptional
98.1%
Exceptional
98.0%
4th Grade
Exceptional
97.9%
Exceptional
97.8%
5th Grade
Exceptional
97.8%
Exceptional
97.7%
6th Grade
Exceptional
97.5%
Exceptional
97.4%
7th Grade
Exceptional
96.7%
Exceptional
96.6%
8th Grade
Exceptional
96.5%
Exceptional
96.3%
9th Grade
Exceptional
95.7%
Exceptional
95.4%
10th Grade
Exceptional
94.8%
Exceptional
94.3%
11th Grade
Exceptional
93.8%
Good
92.8%
12th Grade, No Diploma
Exceptional
92.6%
Average
91.1%
High School Diploma
Exceptional
90.7%
Average
89.2%
GED/Equivalency
Exceptional
87.5%
Tragic
84.6%
College, Under 1 year
Exceptional
68.2%
Tragic
62.6%
College, 1 year or more
Exceptional
62.4%
Tragic
56.2%
Associate's Degree
Exceptional
49.7%
Tragic
42.8%
Bachelor's Degree
Exceptional
41.6%
Tragic
33.2%
Master's Degree
Exceptional
17.2%
Tragic
12.9%
Professional Degree
Exceptional
5.3%
Tragic
3.7%
Doctorate Degree
Exceptional
2.1%
Tragic
1.6%

Romanian vs Iroquois Disability

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Romanian and Iroquois communities in the United States are seen in disability age 35 to 64 (10.6% compared to 14.4%, a difference of 35.3%), disability age 5 to 17 (5.4% compared to 6.9%, a difference of 27.3%), and vision disability (2.1% compared to 2.6%, a difference of 26.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of disability age over 75 (46.2% compared to 48.4%, a difference of 4.8%), cognitive disability (16.6% compared to 18.2%, a difference of 9.7%), and self-care disability (2.4% compared to 2.7%, a difference of 10.5%).
Romanian vs Iroquois Disability
Disability MetricRomanianIroquois
Disability
Good
11.6%
Tragic
13.8%
Males
Average
11.2%
Tragic
13.6%
Females
Exceptional
11.9%
Tragic
14.0%
Age | Under 5 years
Fair
1.3%
Tragic
1.5%
Age | 5 to 17 years
Exceptional
5.4%
Tragic
6.9%
Age | 18 to 34 years
Fair
6.6%
Tragic
7.9%
Age | 35 to 64 years
Exceptional
10.6%
Tragic
14.4%
Age | 65 to 74 years
Exceptional
22.1%
Tragic
25.4%
Age | Over 75 years
Exceptional
46.2%
Tragic
48.4%
Vision
Exceptional
2.1%
Tragic
2.6%
Hearing
Poor
3.1%
Tragic
3.7%
Cognitive
Exceptional
16.6%
Tragic
18.2%
Ambulatory
Excellent
6.0%
Tragic
7.1%
Self-Care
Good
2.4%
Tragic
2.7%