Chickasaw vs Brazilian Community Comparison

COMPARE

Chickasaw
Race
Ancestry
AfghanAfricanAlaska NativeAlaskan AthabascanAlbanianAleutAlsatianAmericanApacheArabArapahoArgentineanArmenianAssyrian/Chaldean/SyriacAustralianAustrianBahamianBangladeshiBarbadianBasqueBelgianBelizeanBermudanBhutaneseBlackfeetBolivianBritishBritish 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 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
Brazilian
Race
Ancestry
AfghanAfricanAlaska NativeAlaskan AthabascanAlbanianAleutAlsatianAmericanApacheArabArapahoArgentineanArmenianAssyrian/Chaldean/SyriacAustralianAustrianBahamianBangladeshiBarbadianBasqueBelgianBelizeanBermudanBhutaneseBlackfeetBolivianBrazilianBritishBritish West IndianBulgarianBurmeseCajunCambodianCanadianCape VerdeanCarpatho RusynCelticCentral AmericanCentral American IndianCherokeeCheyenneChileanChineseChippewaChoctawColombianColvilleComancheCosta 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

Chickasaw

Brazilians

Fair
Good
3,663
SOCIAL INDEX
34.2/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
212th/ 347
SOCIAL RANK
6,919
SOCIAL INDEX
66.7/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
136th/ 347
SOCIAL RANK

Brazilian Integration in Chickasaw Communities

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 115,160,864 people shows a strong positive correlation between the proportion of Brazilians within Chickasaw communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.786. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Chickasaw within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.786% in Brazilians. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Chickasaw corresponds to an increase of 785.8 Brazilians.
Chickasaw Integration in Brazilian Communities

Chickasaw vs Brazilian Income

When considering income, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Brazilian communities in the United States are seen in per capita income ($36,475 compared to $46,700, a difference of 28.0%), median household income ($70,005 compared to $88,934, a difference of 27.0%), and householder income ages 45 - 64 years ($82,193 compared to $104,408, a difference of 27.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of wage/income gap (27.2% compared to 26.7%, a difference of 1.6%), householder income over 65 years ($53,732 compared to $61,465, a difference of 14.4%), and median female earnings ($34,414 compared to $40,483, a difference of 17.6%).
Chickasaw vs Brazilian Income
Income MetricChickasawBrazilian
Per Capita Income
Tragic
$36,475
Exceptional
$46,700
Median Family Income
Tragic
$85,356
Excellent
$106,942
Median Household Income
Tragic
$70,005
Exceptional
$88,934
Median Earnings
Tragic
$40,672
Exceptional
$48,356
Median Male Earnings
Tragic
$47,832
Exceptional
$56,837
Median Female Earnings
Tragic
$34,414
Excellent
$40,483
Householder Age | Under 25 years
Tragic
$44,763
Exceptional
$54,335
Householder Age | 25 - 44 years
Tragic
$77,929
Excellent
$98,267
Householder Age | 45 - 64 years
Tragic
$82,193
Excellent
$104,408
Householder Age | Over 65 years
Tragic
$53,732
Good
$61,465
Wage/Income Gap
Tragic
27.2%
Tragic
26.7%

Chickasaw vs Brazilian Poverty

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Brazilian communities in the United States are seen in single male poverty (16.3% compared to 11.8%, a difference of 38.8%), child poverty under the age of 5 (21.8% compared to 16.4%, a difference of 33.5%), and female poverty among 18-24 year olds (24.5% compared to 18.6%, a difference of 31.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of seniors poverty over the age of 65 (10.7% compared to 11.3%, a difference of 6.2%), seniors poverty over the age of 75 (11.6% compared to 12.8%, a difference of 10.2%), and married-couple family poverty (5.8% compared to 5.0%, a difference of 15.2%).
Chickasaw vs Brazilian Poverty
Poverty MetricChickasawBrazilian
Poverty
Tragic
14.7%
Good
11.9%
Families
Tragic
10.8%
Excellent
8.6%
Males
Tragic
13.5%
Excellent
10.8%
Females
Tragic
15.9%
Excellent
13.0%
Females 18 to 24 years
Tragic
24.5%
Exceptional
18.6%
Females 25 to 34 years
Tragic
17.0%
Excellent
13.1%
Children Under 5 years
Tragic
21.8%
Excellent
16.4%
Children Under 16 years
Tragic
19.5%
Excellent
15.4%
Boys Under 16 years
Tragic
19.8%
Excellent
15.8%
Girls Under 16 years
Tragic
19.6%
Excellent
15.4%
Single Males
Tragic
16.3%
Exceptional
11.8%
Single Females
Tragic
26.3%
Exceptional
20.1%
Single Fathers
Tragic
19.0%
Exceptional
15.5%
Single Mothers
Tragic
34.4%
Exceptional
28.3%
Married Couples
Tragic
5.8%
Good
5.0%
Seniors Over 65 years
Good
10.7%
Poor
11.3%
Seniors Over 75 years
Exceptional
11.6%
Tragic
12.8%
Receiving Food Stamps
Tragic
13.1%
Excellent
11.1%

Chickasaw vs Brazilian Unemployment

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Brazilian communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among seniors over 75 years (7.3% compared to 9.3%, a difference of 26.0%), unemployment among seniors over 65 years (4.4% compared to 5.5%, a difference of 23.7%), and unemployment among ages 65 to 74 years (4.7% compared to 5.6%, a difference of 18.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of male unemployment (5.2% compared to 5.2%, a difference of 0.35%), unemployment among ages 16 to 19 years (16.7% compared to 17.1%, a difference of 2.3%), and unemployment among ages 20 to 24 years (9.9% compared to 10.2%, a difference of 2.7%).
Chickasaw vs Brazilian Unemployment
Unemployment MetricChickasawBrazilian
Unemployment
Exceptional
5.0%
Average
5.3%
Males
Excellent
5.2%
Good
5.2%
Females
Excellent
5.1%
Tragic
5.5%
Youth < 25
Exceptional
11.2%
Good
11.5%
Age | 16 to 19 years
Exceptional
16.7%
Exceptional
17.1%
Age | 20 to 24 years
Exceptional
9.9%
Good
10.2%
Age | 25 to 29 years
Fair
6.7%
Excellent
6.5%
Age | 30 to 34 years
Tragic
6.2%
Average
5.4%
Age | 35 to 44 years
Tragic
4.9%
Fair
4.7%
Age | 45 to 54 years
Exceptional
4.2%
Fair
4.6%
Age | 55 to 59 years
Good
4.8%
Tragic
5.0%
Age | 60 to 64 years
Exceptional
4.3%
Poor
5.0%
Age | 65 to 74 years
Exceptional
4.7%
Tragic
5.6%
Seniors > 65
Exceptional
4.4%
Tragic
5.5%
Seniors > 75
Exceptional
7.3%
Tragic
9.3%
Women w/ Children < 6
Tragic
9.0%
Average
7.7%
Women w/ Children 6 to 17
Exceptional
8.6%
Fair
9.1%
Women w/ Children < 18
Good
5.4%
Tragic
5.8%

Chickasaw vs Brazilian Labor Participation

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Brazilian communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age > 16 (62.3% compared to 66.6%, a difference of 6.9%), in labor force | age 45-54 (79.0% compared to 83.7%, a difference of 5.9%), and in labor force | age 20-64 (76.2% compared to 80.5%, a difference of 5.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 20-24 (74.5% compared to 75.8%, a difference of 1.8%), in labor force | age 16-19 (38.3% compared to 37.5%, a difference of 2.2%), and in labor force | age 25-29 (81.9% compared to 85.3%, a difference of 4.2%).
Chickasaw vs Brazilian Labor Participation
Labor Participation MetricChickasawBrazilian
In Labor Force | Age > 16
Tragic
62.3%
Exceptional
66.6%
In Labor Force | Age 20-64
Tragic
76.2%
Exceptional
80.5%
In Labor Force | Age 16-19
Exceptional
38.3%
Excellent
37.5%
In Labor Force | Age 20-24
Poor
74.5%
Exceptional
75.8%
In Labor Force | Age 25-29
Tragic
81.9%
Exceptional
85.3%
In Labor Force | Age 30-34
Tragic
81.9%
Exceptional
85.4%
In Labor Force | Age 35-44
Tragic
80.9%
Exceptional
85.0%
In Labor Force | Age 45-54
Tragic
79.0%
Exceptional
83.7%

Chickasaw vs Brazilian Family Structure

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Brazilian communities in the United States are seen in single father households (2.8% compared to 2.2%, a difference of 23.5%), births to unmarried women (36.3% compared to 30.4%, a difference of 19.5%), and divorced or separated (14.2% compared to 12.1%, a difference of 17.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of average family size (3.19 compared to 3.18, a difference of 0.14%), currently married (46.6% compared to 46.4%, a difference of 0.32%), and married-couple households (45.9% compared to 46.2%, a difference of 0.61%).
Chickasaw vs Brazilian Family Structure
Family Structure MetricChickasawBrazilian
Family Households
Good
64.4%
Poor
63.9%
Family Households with Children
Exceptional
28.2%
Good
27.7%
Married-couple Households
Fair
45.9%
Fair
46.2%
Average Family Size
Tragic
3.19
Tragic
3.18
Single Father Households
Tragic
2.8%
Exceptional
2.2%
Single Mother Households
Tragic
7.0%
Average
6.2%
Currently Married
Average
46.6%
Fair
46.4%
Divorced or Separated
Tragic
14.2%
Average
12.1%
Births to Unmarried Women
Tragic
36.3%
Excellent
30.4%

Chickasaw vs Brazilian Vehicle Availability

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Brazilian communities in the United States are seen in 4 or more vehicles in household (7.4% compared to 5.4%, a difference of 38.3%), no vehicles in household (7.9% compared to 10.4%, a difference of 32.1%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (22.2% compared to 17.4%, a difference of 27.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (92.3% compared to 90.0%, a difference of 2.5%), 2 or more vehicles in household (59.0% compared to 53.8%, a difference of 9.8%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (22.2% compared to 17.4%, a difference of 27.4%).
Chickasaw vs Brazilian Vehicle Availability
Vehicle Availability MetricChickasawBrazilian
No Vehicles Available
Exceptional
7.9%
Average
10.4%
1+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
92.3%
Good
90.0%
2+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
59.0%
Tragic
53.8%
3+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
22.2%
Tragic
17.4%
4+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
7.4%
Tragic
5.4%

Chickasaw vs Brazilian Education Level

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Brazilian communities in the United States are seen in professional degree (3.4% compared to 5.0%, a difference of 48.4%), master's degree (11.4% compared to 16.5%, a difference of 44.9%), and doctorate degree (1.5% compared to 2.1%, a difference of 37.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 10th grade (94.1% compared to 93.8%, a difference of 0.22%), nursery school (98.4% compared to 98.0%, a difference of 0.39%), and 1st grade (98.3% compared to 97.9%, a difference of 0.41%).
Chickasaw vs Brazilian Education Level
Education Level MetricChickasawBrazilian
No Schooling Completed
Exceptional
1.7%
Good
2.1%
Nursery School
Exceptional
98.4%
Average
98.0%
Kindergarten
Exceptional
98.4%
Average
97.9%
1st Grade
Exceptional
98.3%
Average
97.9%
2nd Grade
Exceptional
98.3%
Average
97.9%
3rd Grade
Exceptional
98.2%
Average
97.8%
4th Grade
Exceptional
98.0%
Average
97.5%
5th Grade
Exceptional
97.9%
Fair
97.2%
6th Grade
Exceptional
97.6%
Fair
96.9%
7th Grade
Exceptional
96.7%
Fair
96.0%
8th Grade
Exceptional
96.4%
Fair
95.6%
9th Grade
Exceptional
95.5%
Average
94.9%
10th Grade
Excellent
94.1%
Good
93.8%
11th Grade
Fair
92.3%
Good
92.8%
12th Grade, No Diploma
Tragic
90.3%
Good
91.3%
High School Diploma
Poor
88.4%
Good
89.3%
GED/Equivalency
Tragic
83.8%
Good
86.3%
College, Under 1 year
Tragic
60.4%
Good
65.9%
College, 1 year or more
Tragic
53.3%
Good
60.5%
Associate's Degree
Tragic
38.6%
Exceptional
48.7%
Bachelor's Degree
Tragic
30.4%
Exceptional
40.8%
Master's Degree
Tragic
11.4%
Exceptional
16.5%
Professional Degree
Tragic
3.4%
Exceptional
5.0%
Doctorate Degree
Tragic
1.5%
Exceptional
2.1%

Chickasaw vs Brazilian Disability

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Brazilian communities in the United States are seen in hearing disability (4.5% compared to 2.9%, a difference of 54.2%), disability age 35 to 64 (16.1% compared to 10.5%, a difference of 53.5%), and vision disability (3.2% compared to 2.1%, a difference of 47.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of cognitive disability (18.5% compared to 17.1%, a difference of 8.1%), disability age over 75 (51.2% compared to 46.5%, a difference of 10.2%), and disability age 5 to 17 (6.8% compared to 5.9%, a difference of 15.5%).
Chickasaw vs Brazilian Disability
Disability MetricChickasawBrazilian
Disability
Tragic
15.2%
Exceptional
11.4%
Males
Tragic
15.1%
Excellent
10.9%
Females
Tragic
15.2%
Exceptional
11.8%
Age | Under 5 years
Tragic
1.7%
Tragic
1.5%
Age | 5 to 17 years
Tragic
6.8%
Tragic
5.9%
Age | 18 to 34 years
Tragic
9.0%
Excellent
6.4%
Age | 35 to 64 years
Tragic
16.1%
Exceptional
10.5%
Age | 65 to 74 years
Tragic
30.2%
Exceptional
22.4%
Age | Over 75 years
Tragic
51.2%
Exceptional
46.5%
Vision
Tragic
3.2%
Good
2.1%
Hearing
Tragic
4.5%
Good
2.9%
Cognitive
Tragic
18.5%
Good
17.1%
Ambulatory
Tragic
8.0%
Exceptional
5.7%
Self-Care
Tragic
2.9%
Exceptional
2.3%