Burmese vs Chilean Community Comparison

COMPARE

Burmese
Race
Ancestry
AfghanAfricanAlaska NativeAlaskan AthabascanAlbanianAleutAlsatianAmericanApacheArabArapahoArgentineanArmenianAssyrian/Chaldean/SyriacAustralianAustrianBahamianBangladeshiBarbadianBasqueBelgianBelizeanBermudanBhutaneseBlackfeetBolivianBrazilianBritishBritish West IndianBulgarianBurmeseCajunCambodianCanadianCape VerdeanCarpatho RusynCelticCentral AmericanCentral American IndianCherokeeCheyenneChickasawChineseChippewaChoctawColombianColvilleComancheCosta RicanCreeCreekCroatianCrowCubanCypriotCzechCzechoslovakianDanishDelawareDominicanDutchDutch West IndianEastern EuropeanEcuadorianEgyptianEnglishEstonianEthiopianEuropeanFijianFilipinoFinnishFrenchFrench American IndianFrench CanadianGermanGerman RussianGhanaianGreekGuamanian/ChamorroGuatemalanGuyaneseHaitianHmongHonduranHopiHoumaHungarianIcelanderIndian (Asian)IndonesianInupiatIranianIraqiIrishIroquoisIsraeliItalianJamaicanJapaneseJordanianKenyanKiowaKoreanLaotianLatvianLebaneseLiberianLithuanianLumbeeLuxembourgerMacedonianMalaysianMalteseMarshalleseMenomineeMexicanMexican 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
Chilean
Race
Ancestry
AfghanAfricanAlaska NativeAlaskan AthabascanAlbanianAleutAlsatianAmericanApacheArabArapahoArgentineanArmenianAssyrian/Chaldean/SyriacAustralianAustrianBahamianBangladeshiBarbadianBasqueBelgianBelizeanBermudanBhutaneseBlackfeetBolivianBrazilianBritishBritish West IndianBulgarianCajunCambodianCanadianCape VerdeanCarpatho RusynCelticCentral AmericanCentral American IndianCherokeeCheyenneChickasawChileanChineseChippewaChoctawColombianColvilleComancheCosta RicanCreeCreekCroatianCrowCubanCypriotCzechCzechoslovakianDanishDelawareDominicanDutchDutch West IndianEastern EuropeanEcuadorianEgyptianEnglishEstonianEthiopianEuropeanFijianFilipinoFinnishFrenchFrench American IndianFrench CanadianGermanGerman RussianGhanaianGreekGuamanian/ChamorroGuatemalanGuyaneseHaitianHmongHonduranHopiHoumaHungarianIcelanderIndian (Asian)IndonesianInupiatIranianIraqiIrishIroquoisIsraeliItalianJamaicanJapaneseJordanianKenyanKiowaKoreanLaotianLatvianLebaneseLiberianLithuanianLumbeeLuxembourgerMacedonianMalaysianMalteseMarshalleseMenomineeMexicanMexican 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

Burmese

Chileans

Exceptional
Excellent
10,002
SOCIAL INDEX
97.5/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
4th/ 347
SOCIAL RANK
8,759
SOCIAL INDEX
85.1/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
51st/ 347
SOCIAL RANK

Chilean Integration in Burmese Communities

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 245,061,614 people shows a mild positive correlation between the proportion of Chileans within Burmese communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.303. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Burmese within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.003% in Chileans. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Burmese corresponds to an increase of 3.3 Chileans.
Burmese Integration in Chilean Communities

Burmese vs Chilean Income

When considering income, the most significant differences between Burmese and Chilean communities in the United States are seen in median male earnings ($65,236 compared to $56,973, a difference of 14.5%), householder income ages 45 - 64 years ($121,444 compared to $106,611, a difference of 13.9%), and median household income ($103,145 compared to $90,605, a difference of 13.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of householder income under 25 years ($54,800 compared to $53,185, a difference of 3.0%), wage/income gap (28.0% compared to 26.3%, a difference of 6.5%), and median female earnings ($44,911 compared to $40,757, a difference of 10.2%).
Burmese vs Chilean Income
Income MetricBurmeseChilean
Per Capita Income
Exceptional
$52,005
Exceptional
$46,459
Median Family Income
Exceptional
$123,369
Exceptional
$108,429
Median Household Income
Exceptional
$103,145
Exceptional
$90,605
Median Earnings
Exceptional
$54,559
Exceptional
$48,504
Median Male Earnings
Exceptional
$65,236
Exceptional
$56,973
Median Female Earnings
Exceptional
$44,911
Exceptional
$40,757
Householder Age | Under 25 years
Exceptional
$54,800
Exceptional
$53,185
Householder Age | 25 - 44 years
Exceptional
$113,701
Exceptional
$99,900
Householder Age | 45 - 64 years
Exceptional
$121,444
Exceptional
$106,611
Householder Age | Over 65 years
Exceptional
$71,139
Exceptional
$63,957
Wage/Income Gap
Tragic
28.0%
Fair
26.3%

Burmese vs Chilean Poverty

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Burmese and Chilean communities in the United States are seen in receiving food stamps (8.6% compared to 11.0%, a difference of 27.0%), child poverty under the age of 5 (13.2% compared to 15.6%, a difference of 17.8%), and child poverty under the age of 16 (12.8% compared to 14.8%, a difference of 15.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of female poverty among 18-24 year olds (18.9% compared to 19.1%, a difference of 1.1%), single father poverty (15.5% compared to 15.7%, a difference of 1.5%), and single male poverty (11.7% compared to 11.9%, a difference of 1.7%).
Burmese vs Chilean Poverty
Poverty MetricBurmeseChilean
Poverty
Exceptional
10.7%
Excellent
11.8%
Families
Exceptional
7.3%
Excellent
8.5%
Males
Exceptional
9.7%
Excellent
10.7%
Females
Exceptional
11.6%
Excellent
12.9%
Females 18 to 24 years
Exceptional
18.9%
Exceptional
19.1%
Females 25 to 34 years
Exceptional
11.2%
Exceptional
12.8%
Children Under 5 years
Exceptional
13.2%
Exceptional
15.6%
Children Under 16 years
Exceptional
12.8%
Exceptional
14.8%
Boys Under 16 years
Exceptional
13.0%
Exceptional
15.0%
Girls Under 16 years
Exceptional
13.0%
Exceptional
15.1%
Single Males
Exceptional
11.7%
Exceptional
11.9%
Single Females
Exceptional
18.3%
Exceptional
19.9%
Single Fathers
Exceptional
15.5%
Exceptional
15.7%
Single Mothers
Exceptional
26.2%
Exceptional
27.9%
Married Couples
Exceptional
4.3%
Excellent
4.9%
Seniors Over 65 years
Exceptional
10.1%
Fair
11.2%
Seniors Over 75 years
Excellent
11.7%
Poor
12.6%
Receiving Food Stamps
Exceptional
8.6%
Excellent
11.0%

Burmese vs Chilean Unemployment

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Burmese and Chilean communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among women with children under 6 years (6.5% compared to 7.2%, a difference of 10.9%), unemployment among women with children ages 6 to 17 years (8.0% compared to 8.8%, a difference of 10.9%), and unemployment among women with children under 18 years (4.9% compared to 5.3%, a difference of 7.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among youth under 25 years (11.3% compared to 11.3%, a difference of 0.44%), unemployment among ages 60 to 64 years (4.8% compared to 4.8%, a difference of 0.55%), and unemployment among ages 30 to 34 years (5.1% compared to 5.2%, a difference of 0.89%).
Burmese vs Chilean Unemployment
Unemployment MetricBurmeseChilean
Unemployment
Exceptional
4.9%
Exceptional
5.0%
Males
Exceptional
4.9%
Exceptional
5.0%
Females
Exceptional
5.0%
Excellent
5.1%
Youth < 25
Excellent
11.3%
Exceptional
11.3%
Age | 16 to 19 years
Exceptional
17.0%
Average
17.6%
Age | 20 to 24 years
Excellent
10.2%
Exceptional
10.0%
Age | 25 to 29 years
Exceptional
6.2%
Excellent
6.5%
Age | 30 to 34 years
Exceptional
5.1%
Exceptional
5.2%
Age | 35 to 44 years
Exceptional
4.3%
Exceptional
4.4%
Age | 45 to 54 years
Exceptional
4.2%
Exceptional
4.3%
Age | 55 to 59 years
Exceptional
4.5%
Exceptional
4.7%
Age | 60 to 64 years
Excellent
4.8%
Good
4.8%
Age | 65 to 74 years
Exceptional
5.2%
Good
5.3%
Seniors > 65
Exceptional
5.0%
Excellent
5.1%
Seniors > 75
Exceptional
8.2%
Exceptional
8.4%
Women w/ Children < 6
Exceptional
6.5%
Exceptional
7.2%
Women w/ Children 6 to 17
Exceptional
8.0%
Excellent
8.8%
Women w/ Children < 18
Exceptional
4.9%
Good
5.3%

Burmese vs Chilean Labor Participation

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Burmese and Chilean communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (34.5% compared to 35.8%, a difference of 3.7%), in labor force | age 20-24 (73.6% compared to 74.5%, a difference of 1.3%), and in labor force | age 30-34 (85.3% compared to 84.9%, a difference of 0.37%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 35-44 (84.7% compared to 84.7%, a difference of 0.030%), in labor force | age 20-64 (80.3% compared to 80.1%, a difference of 0.19%), and in labor force | age 25-29 (85.1% compared to 85.0%, a difference of 0.20%).
Burmese vs Chilean Labor Participation
Labor Participation MetricBurmeseChilean
In Labor Force | Age > 16
Exceptional
66.2%
Exceptional
66.0%
In Labor Force | Age 20-64
Exceptional
80.3%
Exceptional
80.1%
In Labor Force | Age 16-19
Tragic
34.5%
Poor
35.8%
In Labor Force | Age 20-24
Tragic
73.6%
Poor
74.5%
In Labor Force | Age 25-29
Exceptional
85.1%
Excellent
85.0%
In Labor Force | Age 30-34
Exceptional
85.3%
Excellent
84.9%
In Labor Force | Age 35-44
Exceptional
84.7%
Exceptional
84.7%
In Labor Force | Age 45-54
Exceptional
83.6%
Exceptional
83.4%

Burmese vs Chilean Family Structure

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Burmese and Chilean communities in the United States are seen in births to unmarried women (26.4% compared to 30.7%, a difference of 16.4%), single mother households (5.3% compared to 6.1%, a difference of 15.9%), and divorced or separated (10.7% compared to 12.0%, a difference of 11.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of average family size (3.22 compared to 3.23, a difference of 0.42%), family households (65.7% compared to 65.2%, a difference of 0.91%), and family households with children (28.5% compared to 28.1%, a difference of 1.3%).
Burmese vs Chilean Family Structure
Family Structure MetricBurmeseChilean
Family Households
Exceptional
65.7%
Exceptional
65.2%
Family Households with Children
Exceptional
28.5%
Exceptional
28.1%
Married-couple Households
Exceptional
49.8%
Exceptional
47.5%
Average Family Size
Fair
3.22
Average
3.23
Single Father Households
Exceptional
2.0%
Exceptional
2.2%
Single Mother Households
Exceptional
5.3%
Good
6.1%
Currently Married
Exceptional
48.9%
Good
47.0%
Divorced or Separated
Exceptional
10.7%
Good
12.0%
Births to Unmarried Women
Exceptional
26.4%
Good
30.7%

Burmese vs Chilean Vehicle Availability

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Burmese and Chilean communities in the United States are seen in 4 or more vehicles in household (6.8% compared to 6.4%, a difference of 6.6%), 3 or more vehicles in household (20.6% compared to 19.7%, a difference of 4.8%), and 2 or more vehicles in household (57.8% compared to 56.1%, a difference of 3.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (90.4% compared to 90.2%, a difference of 0.28%), no vehicles in household (9.7% compared to 9.9%, a difference of 2.2%), and 2 or more vehicles in household (57.8% compared to 56.1%, a difference of 3.0%).
Burmese vs Chilean Vehicle Availability
Vehicle Availability MetricBurmeseChilean
No Vehicles Available
Excellent
9.7%
Excellent
9.9%
1+ Vehicles Available
Excellent
90.4%
Good
90.2%
2+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
57.8%
Excellent
56.1%
3+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
20.6%
Good
19.7%
4+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
6.8%
Good
6.4%

Burmese vs Chilean Education Level

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Burmese and Chilean communities in the United States are seen in doctorate degree (2.6% compared to 2.2%, a difference of 22.5%), professional degree (6.1% compared to 5.3%, a difference of 16.9%), and master's degree (19.7% compared to 16.9%, a difference of 16.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of nursery school (98.1% compared to 98.0%, a difference of 0.090%), kindergarten (98.1% compared to 98.0%, a difference of 0.090%), and 1st grade (98.0% compared to 97.9%, a difference of 0.090%).
Burmese vs Chilean Education Level
Education Level MetricBurmeseChilean
No Schooling Completed
Excellent
1.9%
Good
2.0%
Nursery School
Excellent
98.1%
Average
98.0%
Kindergarten
Excellent
98.1%
Average
98.0%
1st Grade
Excellent
98.0%
Average
97.9%
2nd Grade
Excellent
98.0%
Average
97.9%
3rd Grade
Good
97.9%
Average
97.8%
4th Grade
Excellent
97.7%
Average
97.5%
5th Grade
Excellent
97.5%
Average
97.3%
6th Grade
Excellent
97.3%
Average
97.1%
7th Grade
Excellent
96.3%
Average
96.0%
8th Grade
Exceptional
96.1%
Average
95.7%
9th Grade
Exceptional
95.4%
Good
95.0%
10th Grade
Exceptional
94.5%
Good
93.9%
11th Grade
Exceptional
93.6%
Excellent
92.9%
12th Grade, No Diploma
Exceptional
92.6%
Excellent
91.7%
High School Diploma
Exceptional
90.8%
Good
89.6%
GED/Equivalency
Exceptional
88.3%
Excellent
86.6%
College, Under 1 year
Exceptional
71.9%
Exceptional
67.6%
College, 1 year or more
Exceptional
66.7%
Exceptional
62.0%
Associate's Degree
Exceptional
54.6%
Exceptional
49.4%
Bachelor's Degree
Exceptional
46.9%
Exceptional
41.2%
Master's Degree
Exceptional
19.7%
Exceptional
16.9%
Professional Degree
Exceptional
6.1%
Exceptional
5.3%
Doctorate Degree
Exceptional
2.6%
Exceptional
2.2%

Burmese vs Chilean Disability

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Burmese and Chilean communities in the United States are seen in disability age under 5 (1.1% compared to 1.3%, a difference of 14.1%), disability age 5 to 17 (4.8% compared to 5.4%, a difference of 12.6%), and vision disability (1.8% compared to 2.1%, a difference of 12.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of disability age over 75 (45.9% compared to 46.5%, a difference of 1.2%), cognitive disability (16.7% compared to 17.0%, a difference of 2.1%), and hearing disability (2.8% compared to 2.9%, a difference of 2.5%).
Burmese vs Chilean Disability
Disability MetricBurmeseChilean
Disability
Exceptional
10.4%
Exceptional
11.1%
Males
Exceptional
10.0%
Exceptional
10.7%
Females
Exceptional
10.7%
Exceptional
11.5%
Age | Under 5 years
Exceptional
1.1%
Poor
1.3%
Age | 5 to 17 years
Exceptional
4.8%
Exceptional
5.4%
Age | 18 to 34 years
Exceptional
6.0%
Exceptional
6.3%
Age | 35 to 64 years
Exceptional
9.2%
Exceptional
10.2%
Age | 65 to 74 years
Exceptional
20.6%
Exceptional
22.0%
Age | Over 75 years
Exceptional
45.9%
Exceptional
46.5%
Vision
Exceptional
1.8%
Exceptional
2.1%
Hearing
Exceptional
2.8%
Excellent
2.9%
Cognitive
Exceptional
16.7%
Excellent
17.0%
Ambulatory
Exceptional
5.3%
Exceptional
5.7%
Self-Care
Exceptional
2.3%
Exceptional
2.3%