Alaskan Athabascan vs Lithuanian Community Comparison

COMPARE

Alaskan Athabascan
Race
Ancestry
AfghanAfricanAlaska NativeAlaskan AthabascanAlbanianAleutAlsatianAmericanApacheArabArapahoArgentineanArmenianAssyrian/Chaldean/SyriacAustralianAustrianBahamianBangladeshiBarbadianBasqueBelgianBelizeanBermudanBhutaneseBlackfeetBolivianBrazilianBritishBritish West IndianBulgarianBurmeseCajunCambodianCanadianCape VerdeanCarpatho RusynCelticCentral AmericanCentral American IndianCherokeeCheyenneChickasawChileanChineseChippewaChoctawColombianColvilleComancheCosta RicanCreeCreekCroatianCrowCubanCypriotCzechCzechoslovakianDanishDelawareDominicanDutchDutch West IndianEastern EuropeanEcuadorianEgyptianEnglishEstonianEthiopianEuropeanFijianFilipinoFinnishFrenchFrench American IndianFrench CanadianGermanGerman RussianGhanaianGreekGuamanian/ChamorroGuatemalanGuyaneseHaitianHmongHonduranHopiHoumaHungarianIcelanderIndian (Asian)IndonesianInupiatIranianIraqiIrishIroquoisIsraeliItalianJamaicanJapaneseJordanianKenyanKiowaKoreanLaotianLatvianLebaneseLiberianLumbeeLuxembourgerMacedonianMalaysianMalteseMarshalleseMenomineeMexicanMexican 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
Lithuanian
Race
Ancestry
AfghanAfricanAlaska NativeAlbanianAleutAmericanApacheArabArapahoArgentineanArmenianAustralianAustrianBahamianBangladeshiBarbadianBasqueBelgianBelizeanBhutaneseBlackfeetBolivianBrazilianBritishBritish West IndianBulgarianBurmeseCajunCambodianCanadianCape VerdeanCarpatho RusynCelticCentral AmericanCentral American IndianCherokeeCheyenneChickasawChileanChineseChippewaChoctawColombianColvilleComancheCosta RicanCreeCreekCroatianCrowCubanCypriotCzechCzechoslovakianDanishDelawareDominicanDutchDutch West IndianEastern EuropeanEcuadorianEgyptianEnglishEstonianEthiopianEuropeanFijianFilipinoFinnishFrenchFrench American IndianFrench CanadianGermanGerman RussianGhanaianGreekGuamanian/ChamorroGuatemalanGuyaneseHaitianHmongHonduranHopiHoumaHungarianIcelanderIndian (Asian)IndonesianInupiatIranianIraqiIrishIroquoisIsraeliItalianJamaicanJapaneseKenyanKiowaKoreanLaotianLatvianLebaneseLiberianLithuanianLumbeeLuxembourgerMacedonianMalaysianMalteseMarshalleseMenomineeMexicanMexican American IndianMongolianMoroccanNative HawaiianNavajoNepaleseNew ZealanderNicaraguanNigerianNorthern EuropeanNorwegianOkinawanOsagePaiutePakistaniPalestinianPanamanianParaguayanPennsylvania GermanPeruvianPimaPolishPortuguesePotawatomiPuebloPuerto RicanPuget Sound SalishRomanianRussianSalvadoranSamoanScandinavianScotch-IrishScottishSeminoleSerbianShoshoneSierra LeoneanSiouxSlavicSlovakSloveneSomaliSouth AfricanSouth AmericanSouth American IndianSpaniardSpanishSpanish AmericanSri LankanSubsaharan AfricanSudaneseSwedishSwissSyrianThaiTlingit-HaidaTohono O'OdhamTonganTrinidadian and TobagonianTsimshianTurkishUgandanUkrainianUruguayanUteVenezuelanVietnameseWelshWest IndianYakamaYaquiYugoslavianYumanYup'ikZimbabwean
Immigration
NonimmigrantsImmigrantsAfghanistanAfricaAlbaniaArgentinaArmeniaAsiaAustraliaAustriaBahamasBangladeshBarbadosBelarusBelgiumBelizeBoliviaBosnia and HerzegovinaBrazilBulgariaBurma/MyanmarCambodiaCameroonCanadaCaribbeanCentral AmericaChileChinaColombiaCosta RicaCubaCzechoslovakiaDenmarkDominicaDominican RepublicEastern AfricaEastern AsiaEastern EuropeEcuadorEgyptEl SalvadorEnglandEritreaEthiopiaEuropeFijiFranceGermanyGhanaGreeceGrenadaGuatemalaGuyanaHaitiHondurasHong KongHungaryIndiaIndonesiaIranIraqIrelandIsraelItalyJamaicaJapanKazakhstanKenyaKoreaLaosLatin AmericaLatviaLebanonLiberiaLithuaniaMalaysiaMexicoMicronesiaMiddle AfricaMoldovaMoroccoNepalNetherlandsNicaraguaNigeriaNorth AmericaNorth MacedoniaNorthern AfricaNorthern EuropeNorwayOceaniaPakistanPanamaPeruPhilippinesPolandPortugalRomaniaRussiaSaudi ArabiaScotlandSerbiaSingaporeSomaliaSouth AfricaSouth AmericaSouth Central AsiaSouth Eastern AsiaSouthern EuropeSpainSri LankaSt. Vincent and the GrenadinesSudanSwedenSwitzerlandSyriaTaiwanThailandTrinidad and TobagoTurkeyUgandaUkraineUruguayUzbekistanVenezuelaVietnamWestern AfricaWestern AsiaWestern EuropeZimbabweAzores
Social Comparison
Social Comparison
Income
Poverty
Unemployment
Labor Participation
Family Structure
Vehicle Availability
Education Level
Disability

Social Comparison

Alaskan Athabascans

Lithuanians

Fair
Excellent
2,687
SOCIAL INDEX
24.4/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
246th/ 347
SOCIAL RANK
8,827
SOCIAL INDEX
85.7/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
46th/ 347
SOCIAL RANK

Lithuanian Integration in Alaskan Athabascan Communities

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 43,123,849 people shows a significant positive correlation between the proportion of Lithuanians within Alaskan Athabascan communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.625. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Alaskan Athabascans within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.016% in Lithuanians. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Alaskan Athabascans corresponds to an increase of 16.1 Lithuanians.
Alaskan Athabascan Integration in Lithuanian Communities

Alaskan Athabascan vs Lithuanian Income

When considering income, the most significant differences between Alaskan Athabascan and Lithuanian communities in the United States are seen in per capita income ($39,163 compared to $49,448, a difference of 26.3%), householder income ages 45 - 64 years ($90,951 compared to $112,484, a difference of 23.7%), and median male earnings ($49,748 compared to $61,228, a difference of 23.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of householder income under 25 years ($51,713 compared to $53,552, a difference of 3.6%), householder income over 65 years ($62,330 compared to $65,209, a difference of 4.6%), and median female earnings ($37,905 compared to $42,108, a difference of 11.1%).
Alaskan Athabascan vs Lithuanian Income
Income MetricAlaskan AthabascanLithuanian
Per Capita Income
Tragic
$39,163
Exceptional
$49,448
Median Family Income
Tragic
$94,429
Exceptional
$115,395
Median Household Income
Tragic
$76,383
Exceptional
$93,852
Median Earnings
Tragic
$43,393
Exceptional
$50,991
Median Male Earnings
Tragic
$49,748
Exceptional
$61,228
Median Female Earnings
Tragic
$37,905
Exceptional
$42,108
Householder Age | Under 25 years
Fair
$51,713
Exceptional
$53,552
Householder Age | 25 - 44 years
Tragic
$88,446
Exceptional
$105,223
Householder Age | 45 - 64 years
Tragic
$90,951
Exceptional
$112,484
Householder Age | Over 65 years
Excellent
$62,330
Exceptional
$65,209
Wage/Income Gap
Average
25.8%
Tragic
28.7%

Alaskan Athabascan vs Lithuanian Poverty

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Alaskan Athabascan and Lithuanian communities in the United States are seen in female poverty among 25-34 year olds (19.1% compared to 12.2%, a difference of 56.3%), married-couple family poverty (6.1% compared to 4.0%, a difference of 53.2%), and receiving food stamps (14.7% compared to 9.7%, a difference of 51.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of single father poverty (18.1% compared to 17.3%, a difference of 4.6%), single mother poverty (30.3% compared to 27.4%, a difference of 10.5%), and seniors poverty over the age of 65 (10.6% compared to 9.1%, a difference of 17.0%).
Alaskan Athabascan vs Lithuanian Poverty
Poverty MetricAlaskan AthabascanLithuanian
Poverty
Tragic
13.6%
Exceptional
10.5%
Families
Tragic
10.1%
Exceptional
7.2%
Males
Tragic
12.8%
Exceptional
9.5%
Females
Tragic
14.4%
Exceptional
11.4%
Females 18 to 24 years
Tragic
22.5%
Exceptional
18.7%
Females 25 to 34 years
Tragic
19.1%
Exceptional
12.2%
Children Under 5 years
Tragic
21.8%
Exceptional
15.2%
Children Under 16 years
Tragic
17.5%
Exceptional
13.5%
Boys Under 16 years
Tragic
17.6%
Exceptional
14.0%
Girls Under 16 years
Tragic
18.3%
Exceptional
13.9%
Single Males
Tragic
16.1%
Fair
13.0%
Single Females
Tragic
23.6%
Exceptional
19.2%
Single Fathers
Tragic
18.1%
Tragic
17.3%
Single Mothers
Tragic
30.3%
Exceptional
27.4%
Married Couples
Tragic
6.1%
Exceptional
4.0%
Seniors Over 65 years
Good
10.6%
Exceptional
9.1%
Seniors Over 75 years
Tragic
13.4%
Exceptional
10.6%
Receiving Food Stamps
Tragic
14.7%
Exceptional
9.7%

Alaskan Athabascan vs Lithuanian Unemployment

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Alaskan Athabascan and Lithuanian communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among ages 45 to 54 years (8.5% compared to 4.3%, a difference of 98.1%), male unemployment (9.8% compared to 5.0%, a difference of 97.2%), and unemployment among ages 35 to 44 years (8.6% compared to 4.4%, a difference of 95.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among ages 16 to 19 years (17.7% compared to 16.7%, a difference of 5.8%), unemployment among youth under 25 years (12.2% compared to 11.3%, a difference of 8.4%), and unemployment among seniors over 75 years (11.0% compared to 9.9%, a difference of 11.5%).
Alaskan Athabascan vs Lithuanian Unemployment
Unemployment MetricAlaskan AthabascanLithuanian
Unemployment
Tragic
7.7%
Exceptional
4.8%
Males
Tragic
9.8%
Exceptional
5.0%
Females
Tragic
6.1%
Exceptional
4.7%
Youth < 25
Tragic
12.2%
Exceptional
11.3%
Age | 16 to 19 years
Fair
17.7%
Exceptional
16.7%
Age | 20 to 24 years
Tragic
11.6%
Good
10.2%
Age | 25 to 29 years
Tragic
10.8%
Good
6.5%
Age | 30 to 34 years
Tragic
7.0%
Good
5.4%
Age | 35 to 44 years
Tragic
8.6%
Exceptional
4.4%
Age | 45 to 54 years
Tragic
8.5%
Exceptional
4.3%
Age | 55 to 59 years
Tragic
7.1%
Excellent
4.7%
Age | 60 to 64 years
Tragic
8.4%
Excellent
4.8%
Age | 65 to 74 years
Tragic
7.4%
Fair
5.4%
Seniors > 65
Tragic
7.0%
Average
5.1%
Seniors > 75
Tragic
11.0%
Tragic
9.9%
Women w/ Children < 6
Tragic
9.1%
Fair
7.8%
Women w/ Children 6 to 17
Exceptional
8.5%
Tragic
9.4%
Women w/ Children < 18
Tragic
6.3%
Exceptional
5.0%

Alaskan Athabascan vs Lithuanian Labor Participation

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Alaskan Athabascan and Lithuanian communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (45.2% compared to 40.4%, a difference of 11.8%), in labor force | age 35-44 (81.3% compared to 85.2%, a difference of 4.8%), and in labor force | age 30-34 (81.7% compared to 85.6%, a difference of 4.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age > 16 (64.8% compared to 64.8%, a difference of 0.080%), in labor force | age 45-54 (81.8% compared to 83.6%, a difference of 2.3%), and in labor force | age 20-24 (79.1% compared to 77.0%, a difference of 2.8%).
Alaskan Athabascan vs Lithuanian Labor Participation
Labor Participation MetricAlaskan AthabascanLithuanian
In Labor Force | Age > 16
Poor
64.8%
Poor
64.8%
In Labor Force | Age 20-64
Tragic
76.9%
Exceptional
80.2%
In Labor Force | Age 16-19
Exceptional
45.2%
Exceptional
40.4%
In Labor Force | Age 20-24
Exceptional
79.1%
Exceptional
77.0%
In Labor Force | Age 25-29
Tragic
82.3%
Exceptional
85.8%
In Labor Force | Age 30-34
Tragic
81.7%
Exceptional
85.6%
In Labor Force | Age 35-44
Tragic
81.3%
Exceptional
85.2%
In Labor Force | Age 45-54
Tragic
81.8%
Exceptional
83.6%

Alaskan Athabascan vs Lithuanian Family Structure

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Alaskan Athabascan and Lithuanian communities in the United States are seen in single father households (3.4% compared to 2.1%, a difference of 59.9%), single mother households (7.3% compared to 5.4%, a difference of 34.5%), and births to unmarried women (37.7% compared to 29.6%, a difference of 27.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of family households (61.8% compared to 64.0%, a difference of 3.6%), family households with children (27.6% compared to 26.6%, a difference of 3.7%), and average family size (3.27 compared to 3.10, a difference of 5.2%).
Alaskan Athabascan vs Lithuanian Family Structure
Family Structure MetricAlaskan AthabascanLithuanian
Family Households
Tragic
61.8%
Fair
64.0%
Family Households with Children
Good
27.6%
Tragic
26.6%
Married-couple Households
Tragic
43.6%
Exceptional
48.9%
Average Family Size
Exceptional
3.27
Tragic
3.10
Single Father Households
Tragic
3.4%
Exceptional
2.1%
Single Mother Households
Tragic
7.3%
Exceptional
5.4%
Currently Married
Tragic
44.6%
Exceptional
49.0%
Divorced or Separated
Tragic
13.1%
Exceptional
11.7%
Births to Unmarried Women
Tragic
37.7%
Exceptional
29.6%

Alaskan Athabascan vs Lithuanian Vehicle Availability

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Alaskan Athabascan and Lithuanian communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (15.6% compared to 8.4%, a difference of 84.9%), 4 or more vehicles in household (8.1% compared to 6.3%, a difference of 27.7%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (21.9% compared to 20.1%, a difference of 9.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 2 or more vehicles in household (55.2% compared to 58.2%, a difference of 5.5%), 1 or more vehicles in household (86.0% compared to 91.7%, a difference of 6.7%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (21.9% compared to 20.1%, a difference of 9.1%).
Alaskan Athabascan vs Lithuanian Vehicle Availability
Vehicle Availability MetricAlaskan AthabascanLithuanian
No Vehicles Available
Tragic
15.6%
Exceptional
8.4%
1+ Vehicles Available
Tragic
86.0%
Exceptional
91.7%
2+ Vehicles Available
Average
55.2%
Exceptional
58.2%
3+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
21.9%
Excellent
20.1%
4+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
8.1%
Average
6.3%

Alaskan Athabascan vs Lithuanian Education Level

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Alaskan Athabascan and Lithuanian communities in the United States are seen in master's degree (11.6% compared to 17.7%, a difference of 53.3%), bachelor's degree (28.8% compared to 42.2%, a difference of 46.6%), and professional degree (3.8% compared to 5.4%, a difference of 41.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 8th grade (97.3% compared to 97.3%, a difference of 0.060%), 5th grade (98.3% compared to 98.2%, a difference of 0.070%), and 4th grade (98.4% compared to 98.3%, a difference of 0.080%).
Alaskan Athabascan vs Lithuanian Education Level
Education Level MetricAlaskan AthabascanLithuanian
No Schooling Completed
Exceptional
1.5%
Exceptional
1.4%
Nursery School
Exceptional
98.8%
Exceptional
98.6%
Kindergarten
Exceptional
98.8%
Exceptional
98.6%
1st Grade
Exceptional
98.8%
Exceptional
98.6%
2nd Grade
Exceptional
98.7%
Exceptional
98.5%
3rd Grade
Exceptional
98.7%
Exceptional
98.5%
4th Grade
Exceptional
98.4%
Exceptional
98.3%
5th Grade
Exceptional
98.3%
Exceptional
98.2%
6th Grade
Exceptional
98.1%
Exceptional
98.1%
7th Grade
Exceptional
97.6%
Exceptional
97.5%
8th Grade
Exceptional
97.3%
Exceptional
97.3%
9th Grade
Exceptional
96.4%
Exceptional
96.6%
10th Grade
Exceptional
95.4%
Exceptional
95.8%
11th Grade
Exceptional
93.9%
Exceptional
94.8%
12th Grade, No Diploma
Exceptional
92.3%
Exceptional
93.6%
High School Diploma
Exceptional
90.9%
Exceptional
92.0%
GED/Equivalency
Fair
85.3%
Exceptional
88.9%
College, Under 1 year
Tragic
61.0%
Exceptional
68.8%
College, 1 year or more
Tragic
53.4%
Exceptional
62.9%
Associate's Degree
Tragic
36.5%
Exceptional
50.6%
Bachelor's Degree
Tragic
28.8%
Exceptional
42.2%
Master's Degree
Tragic
11.6%
Exceptional
17.7%
Professional Degree
Tragic
3.8%
Exceptional
5.4%
Doctorate Degree
Poor
1.7%
Exceptional
2.3%

Alaskan Athabascan vs Lithuanian Disability

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Alaskan Athabascan and Lithuanian communities in the United States are seen in hearing disability (5.3% compared to 3.4%, a difference of 58.9%), vision disability (3.1% compared to 2.0%, a difference of 54.5%), and disability age 65 to 74 (32.4% compared to 21.4%, a difference of 51.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of self-care disability (2.5% compared to 2.4%, a difference of 7.6%), disability age under 5 (1.5% compared to 1.6%, a difference of 7.6%), and cognitive disability (17.6% compared to 16.3%, a difference of 8.3%).
Alaskan Athabascan vs Lithuanian Disability
Disability MetricAlaskan AthabascanLithuanian
Disability
Tragic
14.4%
Poor
11.9%
Males
Tragic
14.9%
Tragic
11.6%
Females
Tragic
13.9%
Average
12.2%
Age | Under 5 years
Tragic
1.5%
Tragic
1.6%
Age | 5 to 17 years
Tragic
6.3%
Tragic
5.8%
Age | 18 to 34 years
Tragic
9.4%
Tragic
7.0%
Age | 35 to 64 years
Tragic
15.7%
Excellent
10.8%
Age | 65 to 74 years
Tragic
32.4%
Exceptional
21.4%
Age | Over 75 years
Tragic
54.0%
Exceptional
45.1%
Vision
Tragic
3.1%
Exceptional
2.0%
Hearing
Tragic
5.3%
Tragic
3.4%
Cognitive
Tragic
17.6%
Exceptional
16.3%
Ambulatory
Tragic
6.9%
Excellent
6.0%
Self-Care
Poor
2.5%
Exceptional
2.4%