Burmese vs Ugandan Community Comparison

COMPARE

Burmese
Race
Ancestry
AfghanAfricanAlaska NativeAlaskan AthabascanAlbanianAleutAmericanApacheArabArapahoArgentineanArmenianAssyrian/Chaldean/SyriacAustralianAustrianBahamianBangladeshiBarbadianBasqueBelgianBelizeanBermudanBhutaneseBlackfeetBolivianBrazilianBritishBritish West IndianBulgarianBurmeseCajunCambodianCanadianCape VerdeanCarpatho RusynCelticCentral AmericanCentral American IndianCherokeeChickasawChileanChineseChippewaChoctawColombianColvilleComancheCosta RicanCreeCreekCroatianCubanCypriotCzechCzechoslovakianDanishDelawareDominicanDutchDutch West IndianEastern EuropeanEcuadorianEgyptianEnglishEstonianEthiopianEuropeanFijianFilipinoFinnishFrenchFrench American IndianFrench CanadianGermanGerman RussianGhanaianGreekGuamanian/ChamorroGuatemalanGuyaneseHaitianHmongHonduranHopiHoumaHungarianIcelanderIndian (Asian)IndonesianInupiatIranianIraqiIrishIroquoisIsraeliItalianJamaicanJapaneseJordanianKenyanKiowaKoreanLaotianLatvianLebaneseLiberianLithuanianLumbeeLuxembourgerMacedonianMalaysianMalteseMarshalleseMexicanMexican American IndianMongolianMoroccanNative HawaiianNavajoNepaleseNew ZealanderNicaraguanNigerianNorthern EuropeanNorwegianOkinawanOsageOttawaPakistaniPalestinianPanamanianParaguayanPennsylvania GermanPeruvianPimaPolishPortuguesePotawatomiPuebloPuerto RicanPuget Sound SalishRomanianRussianSalvadoranSamoanScandinavianScotch-IrishScottishSeminoleSenegaleseSerbianShoshoneSierra LeoneanSiouxSlavicSlovakSloveneSomaliSouth AfricanSouth AmericanSouth American IndianSoviet UnionSpaniardSpanishSpanish AmericanSpanish American IndianSri LankanSubsaharan AfricanSudaneseSwedishSwissSyrianTaiwaneseThaiTlingit-HaidaTohono O'OdhamTonganTrinidadian and TobagonianTurkishU.S. Virgin IslanderUkrainianUruguayanUteVenezuelanVietnameseWelshWest IndianYakamaYaquiYugoslavianYup'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
Ugandan
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

Ugandans

Exceptional
Average
10,002
SOCIAL INDEX
97.5/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
4th/ 347
SOCIAL RANK
6,220
SOCIAL INDEX
59.7/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
159th/ 347
SOCIAL RANK

Ugandan Integration in Burmese Communities

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 92,182,416 people shows a significant positive correlation between the proportion of Ugandans within Burmese communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.639. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Burmese within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.030% in Ugandans. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Burmese corresponds to an increase of 30.0 Ugandans.
Burmese Integration in Ugandan Communities

Burmese vs Ugandan Income

When considering income, the most significant differences between Burmese and Ugandan communities in the United States are seen in median male earnings ($65,236 compared to $55,290, a difference of 18.0%), median household income ($103,145 compared to $87,557, a difference of 17.8%), and householder income ages 25 - 44 years ($113,701 compared to $96,667, a difference of 17.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of householder income under 25 years ($54,800 compared to $50,923, a difference of 7.6%), median female earnings ($44,911 compared to $40,889, a difference of 9.8%), and median earnings ($54,559 compared to $47,854, a difference of 14.0%).
Burmese vs Ugandan Income
Income MetricBurmeseUgandan
Per Capita Income
Exceptional
$52,005
Excellent
$45,047
Median Family Income
Exceptional
$123,369
Excellent
$106,541
Median Household Income
Exceptional
$103,145
Excellent
$87,557
Median Earnings
Exceptional
$54,559
Excellent
$47,854
Median Male Earnings
Exceptional
$65,236
Good
$55,290
Median Female Earnings
Exceptional
$44,911
Exceptional
$40,889
Householder Age | Under 25 years
Exceptional
$54,800
Tragic
$50,923
Householder Age | 25 - 44 years
Exceptional
$113,701
Good
$96,667
Householder Age | 45 - 64 years
Exceptional
$121,444
Excellent
$103,472
Householder Age | Over 65 years
Exceptional
$71,139
Average
$61,177
Wage/Income Gap
Tragic
28.0%
Exceptional
24.1%

Burmese vs Ugandan Poverty

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Burmese and Ugandan communities in the United States are seen in receiving food stamps (8.6% compared to 12.2%, a difference of 41.6%), child poverty under the age of 5 (13.2% compared to 18.0%, a difference of 36.4%), and child poverty among boys under 16 (13.0% compared to 17.3%, a difference of 33.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of seniors poverty over the age of 75 (11.7% compared to 11.9%, a difference of 1.8%), single male poverty (11.7% compared to 12.3%, a difference of 5.1%), and single father poverty (15.5% compared to 16.3%, a difference of 5.1%).
Burmese vs Ugandan Poverty
Poverty MetricBurmeseUgandan
Poverty
Exceptional
10.7%
Tragic
13.1%
Families
Exceptional
7.3%
Fair
9.3%
Males
Exceptional
9.7%
Tragic
12.2%
Females
Exceptional
11.6%
Poor
14.0%
Females 18 to 24 years
Exceptional
18.9%
Tragic
22.1%
Females 25 to 34 years
Exceptional
11.2%
Good
13.4%
Children Under 5 years
Exceptional
13.2%
Poor
18.0%
Children Under 16 years
Exceptional
12.8%
Poor
17.1%
Boys Under 16 years
Exceptional
13.0%
Poor
17.3%
Girls Under 16 years
Exceptional
13.0%
Poor
17.2%
Single Males
Exceptional
11.7%
Exceptional
12.3%
Single Females
Exceptional
18.3%
Good
20.8%
Single Fathers
Exceptional
15.5%
Average
16.3%
Single Mothers
Exceptional
26.2%
Good
28.8%
Married Couples
Exceptional
4.3%
Fair
5.3%
Seniors Over 65 years
Exceptional
10.1%
Poor
11.4%
Seniors Over 75 years
Excellent
11.7%
Good
11.9%
Receiving Food Stamps
Exceptional
8.6%
Fair
12.2%

Burmese vs Ugandan Unemployment

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Burmese and Ugandan communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among women with children ages 6 to 17 years (8.0% compared to 12.0%, a difference of 51.1%), unemployment among women with children under 18 years (4.9% compared to 5.9%, a difference of 18.9%), and unemployment among women with children under 6 years (6.5% compared to 7.6%, a difference of 16.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among ages 16 to 19 years (17.0% compared to 16.8%, a difference of 0.87%), unemployment among ages 55 to 59 years (4.5% compared to 4.6%, a difference of 1.2%), and unemployment among ages 20 to 24 years (10.2% compared to 10.4%, a difference of 2.4%).
Burmese vs Ugandan Unemployment
Unemployment MetricBurmeseUgandan
Unemployment
Exceptional
4.9%
Poor
5.4%
Males
Exceptional
4.9%
Tragic
5.5%
Females
Exceptional
5.0%
Fair
5.3%
Youth < 25
Excellent
11.3%
Average
11.6%
Age | 16 to 19 years
Exceptional
17.0%
Exceptional
16.8%
Age | 20 to 24 years
Excellent
10.2%
Fair
10.4%
Age | 25 to 29 years
Exceptional
6.2%
Poor
6.8%
Age | 30 to 34 years
Exceptional
5.1%
Exceptional
4.9%
Age | 35 to 44 years
Exceptional
4.3%
Fair
4.8%
Age | 45 to 54 years
Exceptional
4.2%
Tragic
4.9%
Age | 55 to 59 years
Exceptional
4.5%
Exceptional
4.6%
Age | 60 to 64 years
Excellent
4.8%
Poor
4.9%
Age | 65 to 74 years
Exceptional
5.2%
Exceptional
5.1%
Seniors > 65
Exceptional
5.0%
Exceptional
4.8%
Seniors > 75
Exceptional
8.2%
Exceptional
7.7%
Women w/ Children < 6
Exceptional
6.5%
Good
7.6%
Women w/ Children 6 to 17
Exceptional
8.0%
Tragic
12.0%
Women w/ Children < 18
Exceptional
4.9%
Tragic
5.9%

Burmese vs Ugandan Labor Participation

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Burmese and Ugandan communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (34.5% compared to 38.9%, a difference of 12.7%), in labor force | age 20-24 (73.6% compared to 75.4%, a difference of 2.4%), and in labor force | age > 16 (66.2% compared to 67.4%, a difference of 1.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 45-54 (83.6% compared to 83.7%, a difference of 0.12%), in labor force | age 20-64 (80.3% compared to 80.6%, a difference of 0.36%), and in labor force | age 30-34 (85.3% compared to 85.8%, a difference of 0.59%).
Burmese vs Ugandan Labor Participation
Labor Participation MetricBurmeseUgandan
In Labor Force | Age > 16
Exceptional
66.2%
Exceptional
67.4%
In Labor Force | Age 20-64
Exceptional
80.3%
Exceptional
80.6%
In Labor Force | Age 16-19
Tragic
34.5%
Exceptional
38.9%
In Labor Force | Age 20-24
Tragic
73.6%
Good
75.4%
In Labor Force | Age 25-29
Exceptional
85.1%
Exceptional
85.9%
In Labor Force | Age 30-34
Exceptional
85.3%
Exceptional
85.8%
In Labor Force | Age 35-44
Exceptional
84.7%
Exceptional
85.3%
In Labor Force | Age 45-54
Exceptional
83.6%
Exceptional
83.7%

Burmese vs Ugandan Family Structure

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Burmese and Ugandan communities in the United States are seen in single mother households (5.3% compared to 6.5%, a difference of 22.8%), births to unmarried women (26.4% compared to 30.1%, a difference of 14.1%), and single father households (2.0% compared to 2.3%, a difference of 13.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of average family size (3.22 compared to 3.23, a difference of 0.52%), family households with children (28.5% compared to 27.4%, a difference of 3.8%), and family households (65.7% compared to 61.7%, a difference of 6.6%).
Burmese vs Ugandan Family Structure
Family Structure MetricBurmeseUgandan
Family Households
Exceptional
65.7%
Tragic
61.7%
Family Households with Children
Exceptional
28.5%
Average
27.4%
Married-couple Households
Exceptional
49.8%
Tragic
43.8%
Average Family Size
Fair
3.22
Average
3.23
Single Father Households
Exceptional
2.0%
Good
2.3%
Single Mother Households
Exceptional
5.3%
Fair
6.5%
Currently Married
Exceptional
48.9%
Tragic
44.2%
Divorced or Separated
Exceptional
10.7%
Exceptional
11.8%
Births to Unmarried Women
Exceptional
26.4%
Excellent
30.1%

Burmese vs Ugandan Vehicle Availability

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Burmese and Ugandan communities in the United States are seen in 4 or more vehicles in household (6.8% compared to 5.7%, a difference of 19.3%), no vehicles in household (9.7% compared to 11.4%, a difference of 18.0%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (20.6% compared to 17.8%, a difference of 16.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (90.4% compared to 88.9%, a difference of 1.8%), 2 or more vehicles in household (57.8% compared to 53.5%, a difference of 8.1%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (20.6% compared to 17.8%, a difference of 16.1%).
Burmese vs Ugandan Vehicle Availability
Vehicle Availability MetricBurmeseUgandan
No Vehicles Available
Excellent
9.7%
Tragic
11.4%
1+ Vehicles Available
Excellent
90.4%
Tragic
88.9%
2+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
57.8%
Tragic
53.5%
3+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
20.6%
Tragic
17.8%
4+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
6.8%
Tragic
5.7%

Burmese vs Ugandan Education Level

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Burmese and Ugandan communities in the United States are seen in professional degree (6.1% compared to 5.1%, a difference of 20.1%), doctorate degree (2.6% compared to 2.2%, a difference of 18.4%), and master's degree (19.7% compared to 17.1%, a difference of 15.0%). 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 Ugandan Education Level
Education Level MetricBurmeseUgandan
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
97.6%
5th Grade
Excellent
97.5%
Average
97.4%
6th Grade
Excellent
97.3%
Good
97.1%
7th Grade
Excellent
96.3%
Good
96.2%
8th Grade
Exceptional
96.1%
Good
95.9%
9th Grade
Exceptional
95.4%
Good
95.1%
10th Grade
Exceptional
94.5%
Excellent
94.0%
11th Grade
Exceptional
93.6%
Excellent
92.9%
12th Grade, No Diploma
Exceptional
92.6%
Good
91.5%
High School Diploma
Exceptional
90.8%
Excellent
89.7%
GED/Equivalency
Exceptional
88.3%
Good
86.1%
College, Under 1 year
Exceptional
71.9%
Excellent
66.8%
College, 1 year or more
Exceptional
66.7%
Exceptional
61.2%
Associate's Degree
Exceptional
54.6%
Exceptional
48.7%
Bachelor's Degree
Exceptional
46.9%
Exceptional
40.8%
Master's Degree
Exceptional
19.7%
Exceptional
17.1%
Professional Degree
Exceptional
6.1%
Exceptional
5.1%
Doctorate Degree
Exceptional
2.6%
Exceptional
2.2%

Burmese vs Ugandan Disability

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Burmese and Ugandan communities in the United States are seen in disability age 5 to 17 (4.8% compared to 6.2%, a difference of 28.8%), disability age 35 to 64 (9.2% compared to 11.3%, a difference of 23.0%), and disability age 18 to 34 (6.0% compared to 6.9%, a difference of 16.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of disability age over 75 (45.9% compared to 46.3%, a difference of 0.81%), disability age under 5 (1.1% compared to 1.1%, a difference of 1.3%), and hearing disability (2.8% compared to 2.9%, a difference of 2.5%).
Burmese vs Ugandan Disability
Disability MetricBurmeseUgandan
Disability
Exceptional
10.4%
Excellent
11.4%
Males
Exceptional
10.0%
Excellent
11.0%
Females
Exceptional
10.7%
Exceptional
11.9%
Age | Under 5 years
Exceptional
1.1%
Exceptional
1.1%
Age | 5 to 17 years
Exceptional
4.8%
Tragic
6.2%
Age | 18 to 34 years
Exceptional
6.0%
Tragic
6.9%
Age | 35 to 64 years
Exceptional
9.2%
Average
11.3%
Age | 65 to 74 years
Exceptional
20.6%
Excellent
22.7%
Age | Over 75 years
Exceptional
45.9%
Exceptional
46.3%
Vision
Exceptional
1.8%
Exceptional
2.1%
Hearing
Exceptional
2.8%
Excellent
2.9%
Cognitive
Exceptional
16.7%
Tragic
18.3%
Ambulatory
Exceptional
5.3%
Exceptional
5.7%
Self-Care
Exceptional
2.3%
Exceptional
2.3%