Chilean vs Chinese Community Comparison

COMPARE

Chilean
Race
Ancestry
AfghanAfricanAlaska NativeAlaskan AthabascanAlbanianAleutAlsatianAmericanApacheArabArapahoArgentineanArmenianAssyrian/Chaldean/SyriacAustralianAustrianBahamianBangladeshiBarbadianBasqueBelgianBelizeanBermudanBhutaneseBlackfeetBolivianBrazilianBritishBritish West IndianBulgarianBurmeseCajunCambodianCanadianCape VerdeanCarpatho RusynCelticCentral AmericanCentral American IndianCherokeeCheyenneChickasawChileanChippewaChoctawColombianColvilleComancheCosta RicanCreeCreekCroatianCubanCypriotCzechCzechoslovakianDanishDelawareDominicanDutchDutch West IndianEastern EuropeanEcuadorianEgyptianEnglishEstonianEthiopianEuropeanFijianFilipinoFinnishFrenchFrench American IndianFrench CanadianGermanGerman RussianGhanaianGreekGuamanian/ChamorroGuatemalanGuyaneseHaitianHmongHonduranHungarianIcelanderIndian (Asian)IndonesianInupiatIranianIraqiIrishIroquoisIsraeliItalianJamaicanJapaneseJordanianKenyanKiowaKoreanLaotianLatvianLebaneseLiberianLithuanianLuxembourgerMacedonianMalaysianMalteseMarshalleseMenomineeMexicanMexican 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 TobagonianTurkishU.S. Virgin IslanderUgandanUkrainianUruguayanVenezuelanVietnameseWelshWest IndianYakamaYaquiYugoslavianYumanYup'ikZimbabwean
Immigration
NonimmigrantsImmigrantsAfghanistanAfricaAlbaniaArgentinaArmeniaAsiaAustraliaAustriaBahamasBangladeshBarbadosBelarusBelgiumBelizeBoliviaBosnia and HerzegovinaBrazilBulgariaBurma/MyanmarCambodiaCameroonCanadaCaribbeanCentral 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
Chinese
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
Social Comparison
Social Comparison
Income
Poverty
Unemployment
Labor Participation
Family Structure
Vehicle Availability
Education Level
Disability

Social Comparison

Chileans

Chinese

Excellent
Exceptional
8,759
SOCIAL INDEX
85.1/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
51st/ 347
SOCIAL RANK
9,296
SOCIAL INDEX
90.4/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
23rd/ 347
SOCIAL RANK

Chinese Integration in Chilean Communities

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 55,296,024 people shows a perfect positive correlation between the proportion of Chinese within Chilean communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.970. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Chileans within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.504% in Chinese. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Chileans corresponds to an increase of 504.4 Chinese.
Chilean Integration in Chinese Communities

Chilean vs Chinese Income

When considering income, the most significant differences between Chilean and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in householder income over 65 years ($63,957 compared to $77,465, a difference of 21.1%), householder income under 25 years ($53,185 compared to $58,162, a difference of 9.4%), and householder income ages 45 - 64 years ($106,611 compared to $116,156, a difference of 8.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of median male earnings ($56,973 compared to $56,872, a difference of 0.18%), median earnings ($48,504 compared to $48,836, a difference of 0.68%), and per capita income ($46,459 compared to $46,098, a difference of 0.78%).
Chilean vs Chinese Income
Income MetricChileanChinese
Per Capita Income
Exceptional
$46,459
Exceptional
$46,098
Median Family Income
Exceptional
$108,429
Exceptional
$116,188
Median Household Income
Exceptional
$90,605
Exceptional
$98,496
Median Earnings
Exceptional
$48,504
Exceptional
$48,836
Median Male Earnings
Exceptional
$56,973
Exceptional
$56,872
Median Female Earnings
Exceptional
$40,757
Exceptional
$41,461
Householder Age | Under 25 years
Exceptional
$53,185
Exceptional
$58,162
Householder Age | 25 - 44 years
Exceptional
$99,900
Exceptional
$104,264
Householder Age | 45 - 64 years
Exceptional
$106,611
Exceptional
$116,156
Householder Age | Over 65 years
Exceptional
$63,957
Exceptional
$77,465
Wage/Income Gap
Fair
26.3%
Average
25.9%

Chilean vs Chinese Poverty

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Chilean and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in seniors poverty over the age of 75 (12.6% compared to 9.1%, a difference of 39.4%), married-couple family poverty (4.9% compared to 3.6%, a difference of 35.5%), and seniors poverty over the age of 65 (11.2% compared to 8.3%, a difference of 34.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of single father poverty (15.7% compared to 15.4%, a difference of 2.0%), single male poverty (11.9% compared to 11.0%, a difference of 8.5%), and receiving food stamps (11.0% compared to 9.8%, a difference of 12.4%).
Chilean vs Chinese Poverty
Poverty MetricChileanChinese
Poverty
Excellent
11.8%
Exceptional
9.5%
Families
Excellent
8.5%
Exceptional
6.5%
Males
Excellent
10.7%
Exceptional
8.7%
Females
Excellent
12.9%
Exceptional
10.4%
Females 18 to 24 years
Exceptional
19.1%
Exceptional
16.2%
Females 25 to 34 years
Exceptional
12.8%
Exceptional
11.0%
Children Under 5 years
Exceptional
15.6%
Exceptional
13.1%
Children Under 16 years
Exceptional
14.8%
Exceptional
11.9%
Boys Under 16 years
Exceptional
15.0%
Exceptional
11.9%
Girls Under 16 years
Exceptional
15.1%
Exceptional
12.3%
Single Males
Exceptional
11.9%
Exceptional
11.0%
Single Females
Exceptional
19.9%
Exceptional
16.1%
Single Fathers
Exceptional
15.7%
Exceptional
15.4%
Single Mothers
Exceptional
27.9%
Exceptional
24.6%
Married Couples
Excellent
4.9%
Exceptional
3.6%
Seniors Over 65 years
Fair
11.2%
Exceptional
8.3%
Seniors Over 75 years
Poor
12.6%
Exceptional
9.1%
Receiving Food Stamps
Excellent
11.0%
Exceptional
9.8%

Chilean vs Chinese Unemployment

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Chilean and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among seniors over 75 years (8.4% compared to 5.9%, a difference of 42.6%), unemployment among seniors over 65 years (5.1% compared to 4.2%, a difference of 20.9%), and unemployment among ages 60 to 64 years (4.8% compared to 4.0%, a difference of 20.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among ages 30 to 34 years (5.2% compared to 5.1%, a difference of 1.7%), unemployment among ages 35 to 44 years (4.4% compared to 4.3%, a difference of 2.2%), and male unemployment (5.0% compared to 4.9%, a difference of 2.6%).
Chilean vs Chinese Unemployment
Unemployment MetricChileanChinese
Unemployment
Exceptional
5.0%
Exceptional
4.7%
Males
Exceptional
5.0%
Exceptional
4.9%
Females
Excellent
5.1%
Exceptional
4.5%
Youth < 25
Exceptional
11.3%
Exceptional
10.7%
Age | 16 to 19 years
Average
17.6%
Exceptional
16.0%
Age | 20 to 24 years
Exceptional
10.0%
Exceptional
9.4%
Age | 25 to 29 years
Excellent
6.5%
Exceptional
6.1%
Age | 30 to 34 years
Exceptional
5.2%
Exceptional
5.1%
Age | 35 to 44 years
Exceptional
4.4%
Exceptional
4.3%
Age | 45 to 54 years
Exceptional
4.3%
Exceptional
4.0%
Age | 55 to 59 years
Exceptional
4.7%
Exceptional
4.4%
Age | 60 to 64 years
Good
4.8%
Exceptional
4.0%
Age | 65 to 74 years
Good
5.3%
Exceptional
4.4%
Seniors > 65
Excellent
5.1%
Exceptional
4.2%
Seniors > 75
Exceptional
8.4%
Exceptional
5.9%
Women w/ Children < 6
Exceptional
7.2%
Exceptional
6.8%
Women w/ Children 6 to 17
Excellent
8.8%
Tragic
9.3%
Women w/ Children < 18
Good
5.3%
Exceptional
4.9%

Chilean vs Chinese Labor Participation

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Chilean and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (35.8% compared to 38.6%, a difference of 8.0%), in labor force | age 20-24 (74.5% compared to 77.3%, a difference of 3.7%), and in labor force | age > 16 (66.0% compared to 64.7%, a difference of 2.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 30-34 (84.9% compared to 85.0%, a difference of 0.070%), in labor force | age 35-44 (84.7% compared to 85.1%, a difference of 0.41%), and in labor force | age 20-64 (80.1% compared to 80.7%, a difference of 0.70%).
Chilean vs Chinese Labor Participation
Labor Participation MetricChileanChinese
In Labor Force | Age > 16
Exceptional
66.0%
Tragic
64.7%
In Labor Force | Age 20-64
Exceptional
80.1%
Exceptional
80.7%
In Labor Force | Age 16-19
Poor
35.8%
Exceptional
38.6%
In Labor Force | Age 20-24
Poor
74.5%
Exceptional
77.3%
In Labor Force | Age 25-29
Excellent
85.0%
Poor
84.3%
In Labor Force | Age 30-34
Excellent
84.9%
Excellent
85.0%
In Labor Force | Age 35-44
Exceptional
84.7%
Exceptional
85.1%
In Labor Force | Age 45-54
Exceptional
83.4%
Exceptional
84.1%

Chilean vs Chinese Family Structure

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Chilean and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in single mother households (6.1% compared to 5.2%, a difference of 18.7%), single father households (2.2% compared to 2.0%, a difference of 12.3%), and family households with children (28.1% compared to 26.0%, a difference of 8.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of births to unmarried women (30.7% compared to 30.2%, a difference of 1.4%), average family size (3.23 compared to 3.34, a difference of 3.4%), and family households (65.2% compared to 68.1%, a difference of 4.6%).
Chilean vs Chinese Family Structure
Family Structure MetricChileanChinese
Family Households
Exceptional
65.2%
Exceptional
68.1%
Family Households with Children
Exceptional
28.1%
Tragic
26.0%
Married-couple Households
Exceptional
47.5%
Exceptional
50.4%
Average Family Size
Average
3.23
Exceptional
3.34
Single Father Households
Exceptional
2.2%
Exceptional
2.0%
Single Mother Households
Good
6.1%
Exceptional
5.2%
Currently Married
Good
47.0%
Exceptional
49.5%
Divorced or Separated
Good
12.0%
Exceptional
11.2%
Births to Unmarried Women
Good
30.7%
Excellent
30.2%

Chilean vs Chinese Vehicle Availability

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Chilean and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in 4 or more vehicles in household (6.4% compared to 8.8%, a difference of 38.3%), 3 or more vehicles in household (19.7% compared to 23.9%, a difference of 21.2%), and no vehicles in household (9.9% compared to 8.2%, a difference of 20.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (90.2% compared to 91.9%, a difference of 1.9%), 2 or more vehicles in household (56.1% compared to 60.1%, a difference of 7.1%), and no vehicles in household (9.9% compared to 8.2%, a difference of 20.3%).
Chilean vs Chinese Vehicle Availability
Vehicle Availability MetricChileanChinese
No Vehicles Available
Excellent
9.9%
Exceptional
8.2%
1+ Vehicles Available
Good
90.2%
Exceptional
91.9%
2+ Vehicles Available
Excellent
56.1%
Exceptional
60.1%
3+ Vehicles Available
Good
19.7%
Exceptional
23.9%
4+ Vehicles Available
Good
6.4%
Exceptional
8.8%

Chilean vs Chinese Education Level

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Chilean and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in no schooling completed (2.0% compared to 1.5%, a difference of 38.5%), doctorate degree (2.2% compared to 1.8%, a difference of 21.9%), and professional degree (5.3% compared to 4.5%, a difference of 17.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of college, 1 year or more (62.0% compared to 62.2%, a difference of 0.32%), nursery school (98.0% compared to 98.6%, a difference of 0.58%), and kindergarten (98.0% compared to 98.5%, a difference of 0.58%).
Chilean vs Chinese Education Level
Education Level MetricChileanChinese
No Schooling Completed
Good
2.0%
Exceptional
1.5%
Nursery School
Average
98.0%
Exceptional
98.6%
Kindergarten
Average
98.0%
Exceptional
98.5%
1st Grade
Average
97.9%
Exceptional
98.5%
2nd Grade
Average
97.9%
Exceptional
98.5%
3rd Grade
Average
97.8%
Exceptional
98.4%
4th Grade
Average
97.5%
Exceptional
98.3%
5th Grade
Average
97.3%
Exceptional
98.1%
6th Grade
Average
97.1%
Exceptional
97.9%
7th Grade
Average
96.0%
Exceptional
97.1%
8th Grade
Average
95.7%
Exceptional
96.9%
9th Grade
Good
95.0%
Exceptional
96.3%
10th Grade
Good
93.9%
Exceptional
95.5%
11th Grade
Excellent
92.9%
Exceptional
94.6%
12th Grade, No Diploma
Excellent
91.7%
Exceptional
93.6%
High School Diploma
Good
89.6%
Exceptional
92.0%
GED/Equivalency
Excellent
86.6%
Exceptional
89.0%
College, Under 1 year
Exceptional
67.6%
Exceptional
68.3%
College, 1 year or more
Exceptional
62.0%
Exceptional
62.2%
Associate's Degree
Exceptional
49.4%
Exceptional
48.5%
Bachelor's Degree
Exceptional
41.2%
Good
38.5%
Master's Degree
Exceptional
16.9%
Fair
14.6%
Professional Degree
Exceptional
5.3%
Average
4.5%
Doctorate Degree
Exceptional
2.2%
Fair
1.8%

Chilean vs Chinese Disability

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Chilean and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in hearing disability (2.9% compared to 3.7%, a difference of 28.3%), disability age 5 to 17 (5.4% compared to 4.7%, a difference of 14.6%), and ambulatory disability (5.7% compared to 6.5%, a difference of 13.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of disability age 18 to 34 (6.3% compared to 6.3%, a difference of 0.42%), disability age 35 to 64 (10.2% compared to 10.3%, a difference of 0.58%), and vision disability (2.1% compared to 2.0%, a difference of 1.3%).
Chilean vs Chinese Disability
Disability MetricChileanChinese
Disability
Exceptional
11.1%
Tragic
12.2%
Males
Exceptional
10.7%
Tragic
12.1%
Females
Exceptional
11.5%
Fair
12.3%
Age | Under 5 years
Poor
1.3%
Exceptional
1.1%
Age | 5 to 17 years
Exceptional
5.4%
Exceptional
4.7%
Age | 18 to 34 years
Exceptional
6.3%
Exceptional
6.3%
Age | 35 to 64 years
Exceptional
10.2%
Exceptional
10.3%
Age | 65 to 74 years
Exceptional
22.0%
Exceptional
21.7%
Age | Over 75 years
Exceptional
46.5%
Tragic
48.7%
Vision
Exceptional
2.1%
Exceptional
2.0%
Hearing
Excellent
2.9%
Tragic
3.7%
Cognitive
Excellent
17.0%
Exceptional
15.9%
Ambulatory
Exceptional
5.7%
Tragic
6.5%
Self-Care
Exceptional
2.3%
Tragic
2.6%